Nicholas Langdon v The University of Melbourne

[2025] FWC 2801

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009

s.739—Dispute resolution

Nicholas Langdon
v

The University of Melbourne

(C2025/8681)

DEPUTY PRESIDENT COLMAN

MELBOURNE, 19 SEPTEMBER 2025

Application under s 739 – application dismissed

At a conference yesterday, for reasons given on transcript, I dismissed an application made by Nicholas Langdon under s 739 of the Fair Work Act 2009 and the dispute resolution procedure in the University of Melbourne Enterprise Agreement 2024 (Agreement). In summary, it was clear that the subject matter of the dispute related to matters that occurred before the Agreement commenced operation and that the dispute was therefore not one arising from the Agreement. Further, the dispute did not relate to the National Employment Standards (NES) because the provisions of the NES relied on by Mr Langdon in his application have been repealed. Accordingly, it was evident that under the terms of the dispute resolution procedure in the Agreement, the Commission had no authority to arbitrate the dispute. The dispute resolution procedure also applies generally to grievances relating to the employment relationship, however such disputes cannot be arbitrated. They may be conciliated, but the University made very clear that it had no interest in conciliation. The application had no reasonable prospects of success and was dismissed. The file is now closed.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Nicholas Langdon filed an application under section 739 of the Fair Work Act 2009 against The University of Melbourne, seeking resolution of a dispute that arose prior to the commencement of the University of Melbourne Enterprise Agreement 2024. Langdon argued that the Fair Work Commission (FWC) should arbitrate his claims, which were related to his employment and matters preceding the agreement's operation. The University contended that the dispute fell outside the scope of the agreement and was not covered by the National Employment Standards (NES), which had been repealed.

The FWC had to determine whether it had jurisdiction to arbitrate the dispute. The Deputy President, Colman, considered the terms of the Enterprise Agreement 2024 and the legal framework governing dispute resolution. The court found that since the dispute predated the agreement, it did not arise from the Agreement. Furthermore, the NES provisions cited by Langdon were no longer applicable due to their repeal. As the dispute did not pertain to the NES either, the FWC determined it lacked authority to arbitrate under the terms of the dispute resolution procedure in the Enterprise Agreement. Additionally, general employment relationship grievances were not arbitrable under the agreement, although they could be conciliated, a process the University explicitly declined to engage in.

In light of these findings, Deputy President Colman concluded that Langdon's application had no reasonable prospects of success. The application was dismissed, and the case file was closed.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established