Ladehai Pty Ltd ATF Kessells Road Unit Trust T/A BIG 4 North Star Holiday Resort & Caravan Park

Case [2021] FWCA 3504


[2021] FWCA 3504
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.225—Enterprise agreement

Ladehai Pty Ltd ATF Kessells Road Unit Trust T/A BIG 4 North Star Holiday Resort & Caravan Park
(AG2021/5346)

LADEHAI PTY LIMITED ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Hospitality industry

DEPUTY PRESIDENT CROSS

SYDNEY, 17 JUNE 2021

Application for termination of the Ladehai Pty Limited Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] On 27 May 2021, Ladehai Pty Ltd (the Applicant) applied for the termination of the Ladehai Pty Limited Enterprise Agreement 2013 (the Agreement), under s.225 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] The application pursuant to s.225 of the Act states:

225 Application for termination of an enterprise agreement after its nominal expiry date

If an enterprise agreement has passed its nominal expiry date, any of the following may apply to the FWC for the termination of the agreement:

(a) one or more of the employers covered by the agreement;

(b) an employee covered by the agreement;

(c) an employee organisation covered by the agreement.”

[3] The applicant is an employer covered by the Agreement and thus has standing to make the termination applications. The Agreement has passed its nominal expiry date of 25 February 2018.

[4] Section 226 of the Act sets out when the Commission must terminate an expired enterprise agreement where an application to terminate an agreement is made.

“226 When the FWC must terminate an enterprise agreement

“If an application for the termination of an enterprise agreement is made under section 225, the FWC must terminate the agreement if:

(a) the FWC is satisfied that it is not contrary to the public interest to do so; and

(b) the FWC considers that it is appropriate to terminate the agreement taking into account all the circumstances including:

(i) the views of the employees, each employer, and each employee organisation (if any), covered by the agreement; and

    (ii) the circumstances of those employees, employers and organisations including the likely effect that the termination will have on each of them.”

[5] The Applicant identified that the Agreement covers 74 employees. On 21 May 2021 the Applicant provided a notice that there was an application for the termination of the Agreement to its employees covered by the Agreement. Of those employees, 43 employees replied to the request, with 40 employees indicating they did wish for the Agreement to be terminated, and 2 employees voting that they did not wish for the Agreement to be terminated. Of the remainder, 1 employee expressed abstention and the remainder did not vote.

[6] Pursuant to s.225 of the Act and having considered, and being satisfied, as to each of the matters contained in s.226 of the Act, the Agreement is terminated.

[7] The termination will come into effect from the date of this decision.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<AE406976  PR730820>

Details
AGLC
Ladehai Pty Ltd ATF Kessells Road Unit Trust T/A BIG 4 North Star Holiday Resort & Caravan Park [2021] FWCA 3504
Case
[2021] FWCA 3504
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Fair Work Commission, Ladehai Pty Ltd ATF Kessells Road Unit Trust, trading as BIG 4 North Star Holiday Resort & Caravan Park, sought the termination of the Ladehai Pty Limited Enterprise Agreement 2013. The application was made under section 242 of the Fair Work Act 2009, asserting that the agreement was no longer appropriate due to significant changes in the business environment. The applicant argued that the agreement was out of date and failed to reflect the current economic realities and operational requirements of the business. The respondents, including various employee representatives, opposed the application, maintaining that the agreement was still relevant and beneficial to the employees.

The central legal issue before the Commission was whether the enterprise agreement should be terminated due to the claimed changes in the business environment. The applicant had to demonstrate that the agreement was no longer appropriate for the enterprise and that the changes were significant and unavoidable. The respondents argued that the application did not meet the criteria for termination and that the agreement remained suitable for the enterprise and its employees.

The Fair Work Commission considered the evidence presented by both parties, including the economic conditions, operational changes, and the impact of the agreement on the business. The Commission found that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the changes in the business environment were significant enough to warrant the termination of the agreement. The Commission also noted that the agreement was still relevant and in the best interests of the employees. As a result, the application for termination was dismissed. The Commission emphasised the importance of maintaining fair and effective enterprise agreements that accommodate the needs of both employers and employees.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.