Lawtec Electrical Pty Ltd

[2013] FWCA 4482

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Lawtec Electrical Pty Ltd
(AG2013/1521)

LAWTEC ELECTRICAL PTY LTD WHEATSTONE PROJECT AGREEMENT 2013

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT MCCARTHY	PERTH, 8 JULY 2013

Application for approval of the Lawtec Electrical Pty Ltd Wheatstone Project Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Lawtec Electrical Pty Ltd Wheatstone Project Agreement 2013 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] The Employer’s Declaration in Support of Application for Approval of Greenfields Agreement states that the enterprise is a genuine new enterprise that the employer is proposing to establish. It also states that the employer has not employed any of the persons who will be necessary for the normal conduct of that enterprise and will be covered by the Agreement. I am therefore satisfied that the requirements of s.172 (2) (b) have been met and as a consequence the Agreement is a greenfields agreement.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186 and 187 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from seven days from the date of this decision. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is four years from the date of this decision.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Lawtec Electrical Pty Ltd, sought approval of the Lawtec Electrical Pty Ltd Wheatstone Project Agreement 2013 under the Australian Building and Construction Commission (Commission). The Commission had been appointed as a trustee of a superannuation fund, and the applicant had entered into a project agreement with the respondent, Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd. The dispute centred on the interpretation of the agreement, specifically whether certain terms were binding and enforceable.

The court was required to determine whether the project agreement was valid and binding on the parties. The applicant argued that the agreement was binding, while the respondent contended that certain terms were not valid or enforceable. The court had to examine the terms of the agreement and consider whether they complied with relevant legislation and common law principles.

The court found that the project agreement was valid and binding on the parties. The court rejected the respondent's argument that certain terms were not enforceable, holding that they were clear and unambiguous. The court also found that the agreement complied with relevant legislation and common law principles. The court approved the project agreement, and the applicant's application was successful.

The court's approval of the project agreement meant that the terms of the agreement were binding on the parties. The court's decision provided certainty and clarity for the parties, and it enabled the project to proceed as planned. The court's decision also demonstrated the importance of clear and unambiguous project agreements in the construction industry.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established