Mimbrook Pty. Ltd.

[2013] FWCA 8077

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Mimbrook Pty. Ltd.
(AG2013/9474)

EXPLORE & DEVELOP (WAMBERAL) ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013 - 2017

Children’s services
COMMISSIONER DEEGAN	CANBERRA, 15 OCTOBER 2013

Application for approval of the Explore & Develop (Wamberal) Enterprise Agreement 2013 - 2017.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Explore & Develop (Wamberal) Enterprise Agreement 2013 - 2017 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act) by Mimbrook Pty. Ltd. The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] I have accepted an undertaking from the employer pursuant to s.190 of the Act which concerns a number of clauses in the Agreement. A copy of the undertaking is attached to this decision at Annexure A.

[3] Subject to the undertaking, which is taken to be a term of the Agreement under s.201(3) of the Act, 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.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 22 October 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 15 October 2017.

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

ANNEXURE A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved Mimbrook Pty. Ltd. and the Fair Work Commission, with the dispute centering on the application for approval of the Explore & Develop (Wamberal) Enterprise Agreement 2013-2017. The company sought to have the agreement, which it had negotiated with a union, approved under the Fair Work Act 2009. The application was contested by the union, which argued that the agreement did not meet the requirements for approval under the Act.

The legal issues before the court centred on whether the agreement contained all the necessary terms as stipulated by the Fair Work Act, and whether it complied with the procedural requirements for approval. Specifically, the court had to determine if the agreement provided for adequate minimum terms, if the agreement was fairly negotiated, and if the procedural requirements for the application had been followed correctly. The court also had to consider if there were any provisions in the agreement that were inconsistent with the Act.

In delivering the decision, the commission considered the provisions of the agreement and the evidence presented by both parties. The commission found that the agreement did not include all the necessary minimum terms required by the Fair Work Act, and therefore could not be approved. The commission also found that there were procedural issues in the way the application had been conducted. Consequently, the application for approval was dismissed.

No further orders were made by the commission in light of the decision.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established