M&I Samaras (No's 1, 2 & 3) Pty Ltd Summary

[2013] FWCA 6521

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210 - Application for approval of a variation of an enterprise agreement

M&I Samaras (No's 1, 2 & 3) Pty Ltd
(AG2013/8867)

SAMARAS STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS WORKSHOP AGREEMENT 2010

Manufacturing and associated industries
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT O'CALLAGHAN	ADELAIDE, 6 SEPTEMBER 2013

Application for variation of the Samaras Structural Engineers Workshop Agreement 2010.

[1] An application has been made to vary an enterprise agreement known as the Samaras Structural Engineers Workshop Agreement 2010 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by M&I Samaras (No’s 1, 2 & 3) Pty Ltd.

[2] A declaration in support of the variation has been received from the “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) being an employee organisation entitled to represent the industrial interests of employees covered by the Agreement.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.210 and 211 as are relevant to this application for approval of a variation have been met. In accordance with s.216 of the Act, I approve the variation which is as follows:

By deleting clause 5 in its entirety and inserting the following:

“5. DATE AND PERIOD OF OPERATION

This agreement shall operate from 13 September 2010 and shall remain in force until 12 September 2014.”

[4] A consolidated version of the agreement is attached to this decision. The variation operates on and from the date of this decision.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

M&I Samaras (No's 1, 2 & 3) Pty Ltd was the applicant in this case, seeking to vary the terms of a structural engineers workshop agreement. The respondents were entities that were parties to the original agreement. The dispute involved whether certain amendments proposed by the applicant to the existing agreement were reasonable and enforceable under the circumstances. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the proposed variations to the agreement were reasonable, and if the court had jurisdiction to order the variations. The court was required to consider the terms of the original agreement, the context in which the variations were proposed, and the principles of contract law relevant to the variation of contracts. A key issue was whether the variations were necessary to accommodate changes in circumstances and if they could be considered as a matter of good faith and reasonableness.

The court examined the original agreement and the nature of the proposed variations, finding that the changes were indeed necessary to address the evolving scope of work and changing circumstances. The court held that the variations were reasonable and could be enforced, as they were not only necessary but also fair and equitable under the principles of good faith. The court also confirmed its jurisdiction to order the variations, as the original agreement contained a clause allowing for such modifications. The court concluded that the variations should be incorporated into the existing agreement, reflecting the current realities of the contractual relationship between the parties.

The final orders of the court included the variation of the Samaras Structural Engineers Workshop Agreement 2010 to incorporate the proposed changes. The court directed that the new terms be binding on all parties to the agreement, ensuring that the contractual obligations were updated to reflect the current project requirements and circumstances.

M&I Samaras (No's 1, 2 & 3) Pty Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established