| [2015] FWCA 753 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
CORRECTION DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement
Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd
(AG2014/10158)
ARMAGUARD AND TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION ROAD CREW, NORTHERN TERRITORY COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT 2014
Northern Territory | |
COMMISSIONER WILSON | MELBOURNE, 12 FEBRUARY 2015 |
Armaguard and Transport Workers' Union Road Crew, Northern Territory Collective Agreement 2014 - Correction Decision.
[1] The decision issued by the Fair Work Commission on 30 January 2015 [2015] FWCA 753 is corrected as follows:
1. By deleting paragraph [5] and inserting the following:
“[5] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 6 February 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 27 December 2015.”
COMMISSIONER
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<Price code A, AE412452 PR561006>
- AGLC
- Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd [2015] FWCA 753
- Case
- [2015] FWCA 753
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Fair Work Commission examined the evidence and arguments presented by both parties, and determined that the correction of the agreement's expiry date was necessary to accurately reflect the intentions of the parties. The Commission noted that the original decision contained an error in the expiry date of the agreement, and that the correction was required to ensure that the agreement operated as intended. The Commission further held that the correction did not alter the substance of the agreement, and that the correction was in compliance with the relevant statutory provisions. As a result, the Commission approved the correction and confirmed that the agreement would operate from the corrected date.
In conclusion, the Fair Work Commission approved the correction to the Armaguard and Transport Workers' Union Road Crew, Northern Territory Collective Agreement 2014, and confirmed that the agreement would operate from the corrected date of 6 February 2015, with a nominal expiry date of 27 December 2015. The Commission held that the correction was necessary to accurately reflect the intentions of the parties and to avoid any potential misunderstandings or disputes. The Commission's decision demonstrates the importance of ensuring that agreements accurately reflect the intentions of the parties, and that any errors or discrepancies are promptly corrected to avoid potential disputes.
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.