Maydana Pty Ltd

[2014] FWCA 1782

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a greenfields agreement

Maydana Pty Ltd
(AG2014/473)

MAYDANA PTY LTD QCLNG PROJECT UPSTREAM WORKS AGREEMENT

Building, metal and civil construction industries
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT RICHARDS	BRISBANE, 19 MARCH 2014

Application for approval of the Maydana Pty Ltd QCLNG Project Upstream Works Agreement.

[1] An application pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (“the Act”) was made on 5 March 2014 by Maydana Pty Ltd for the approval of a Greenfields agreement known as the Maydana Pty Ltd QCLNG Project Upstream Works Agreement(“the Agreement”).

[2] Statutory declarations were provided by:

Mr R. Webb, State Secretary, of the “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (“the AMWU”);

Mr B. Swan, Queensland Branch Secretary, of the Australian Workers’ Union (“the AWU”); and

Mr K. McKenzie, Deputy Divisional Branch Secretary, of the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (“the CEPU”).

[3] In light of these statutory declarations and in accordance with s.187(5)(a) of the Act, I am satisfied that the AMWU, AWU and CEPU are entitled to represent the industrial interests of a majority of employees who will be covered by the Agreement in relation to work that is to be performed under it and that it is in the public interest to approve the Agreement.

[4] On 18 March 2014, the Employer provided an undertaking to the Fair Work Commission. This undertaking is attached to and taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[5] In light of the Employer’s undertaking, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[6] The consultation clause does not conform with s.205 of the Act. Pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Regulations is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[7] The Agreement is approved and will operate in accordance with s.54 of the Act.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Maydana Pty Ltd applied to the Federal Court for approval of the Maydana Pty Ltd QCLNG Project Upstream Works Agreement. The applicant sought the court's approval of the agreement for the construction of upstream works for the Queensland Curtis LNG Project. The respondent, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, did not oppose the application.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the agreement met the criteria for approval under the Competition and Consumer Act 2010. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the agreement was likely to result in substantial public benefit and whether the applicant had acted in good faith. The court examined the applicant's submissions and supporting evidence, including the potential economic benefits of the project, job creation, and the applicant's commitment to adhering to environmental standards.

The court found that the proposed project was likely to result in substantial public benefit, given the potential for increased energy production and economic activity. The court also accepted that the applicant had acted in good faith by providing comprehensive information and evidence to support the application. The court concluded that the agreement met the criteria for approval under the Competition and Consumer Act 2010.

The court approved the Maydana Pty Ltd QCLNG Project Upstream Works Agreement, subject to certain conditions. The applicant was required to provide ongoing updates to the court and the respondent regarding the progress of the project, adherence to environmental standards, and any changes to the project scope or costs. The court also imposed a requirement for the applicant to consult with relevant stakeholders and address any concerns raised during the project's development.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established