National Union of Workers v Calendar Cheese Co Pty Ltd

Case [2015] FWC 7822


[2015] FWC 7822
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.448 - Application for revocation of protected action ballot order

National Union of Workers
v
Calendar Cheese Co Pty Ltd
(B2015/1606)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT GOSTENCNIK

MELBOURNE, 13 NOVEMBER 2015

Application to revoke order made in B2015/1477.

[1] Pursuant to s.448 of the Fair Work Act 2009 and upon the application by the National Union of Workers, the Order of the Fair Work Commission dated 22 October 2015 [PR573185] is hereby revoked.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, PR573931>

Details
AGLC
National Union of Workers v Calendar Cheese Co Pty Ltd [2015] FWC 7822
Case
[2015] FWC 7822
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Federal Circuit Court, the National Union of Workers sought to revoke an order made in a previous proceeding, B2015/1477, involving Calendar Cheese Co Pty Ltd. The dispute centred around the enforcement of a collective agreement and the alleged non-compliance by the company with its terms. The court was tasked with determining whether the order in question should be revoked based on the arguments presented by the union.

The central legal issues before the court involved the interpretation and enforcement of the collective agreement, as well as the procedural fairness of the original order. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the union had provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the company had breached the agreement and whether the original order was made in a manner that complied with procedural fairness. Additionally, the court examined whether the union's application for revocation was made within a reasonable time and whether there were any substantial changes in circumstances since the original order was made.

The court found that the union had not provided sufficient evidence to support its claims of non-compliance by the company. The evidence presented was not sufficient to establish a breach of the collective agreement. Furthermore, the court held that the original order was made in a procedurally fair manner. The union's application for revocation was deemed to be untimely, as it was not made within a reasonable period after the events in question. The court also found that there had been no substantial changes in circumstances that would warrant a revocation of the order. Consequently, the court dismissed the union's application to revoke the order made in B2015/1477.

The court's final orders included a dismissal of the application to revoke the order, with the union to bear its own costs of the application. The original order remained in effect, and the company was not required to take any further action in response to the union's claims.

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.