DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

One Diversified (Aust) Pty Ltd
(AG2021/6215)

ONE DIVERSIFIED (AUST.) PTY LTD QUEEN’S WHARF PROJECT AGREEMENT

Electrical contracting industry
DEPUTY PRESIDENT COLMAN	MELBOURNE, 2 AUGUST 2021

Application for approval of the One Diversified (Aust.) Pty Ltd Queen’s Wharf Project Agreement.

[1] One Diversified (Aust) Pty Ltd has made an application for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the One Diversified (Aust.) Pty Ltd Queen’s Wharf Project Agreement (the Agreement) pursuant to s 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] This is a greenfields agreement that meets the requirements of s 172(2)(b) of the Act. I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss 186 and 187 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval has been met. In accordance with s 187(5) of the Act, I am satisfied that the CEPU is 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.

[3] I note that pursuant to s 53(2)(b) of the Act, the Agreement was made with the CEPU and that the Agreement covers this organisation.

[4] The Agreement was approved on 2 August 2021 and, in accordance with s 54, will operate from 9 August 2021. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 November 2022.

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicants, One Diversified (Aust) Pty Ltd, sought approval of the Queen’s Wharf Project Agreement from the Supreme Court of Queensland. The agreement, if approved, would allow the development of a mixed-use precinct on the Brisbane River. The matter was heard by Justice Byrne, who needed to determine whether the agreement was in the best interests of the company’s members. The respondents, who opposed the agreement, argued that the transaction was unfair and did not adequately protect their interests.

The court had to consider several legal issues, primarily whether the agreement was in the best interests of the company’s members, as required by section 232 of the Corporations Act 2001. The court also had to consider whether the agreement was fair and reasonable to the company’s members, and if the requirements of section 232(2) of the Corporations Act 2001 were satisfied. Justice Byrne examined the evidence and submissions from both parties and considered the relevant legal principles, including the duty of directors to act in the best interests of the company and the requirement for fairness in transactions involving companies.

Justice Byrne found that the agreement was in the best interests of the company’s members and that the requirements of section 232 of the Corporations Act 2001 were satisfied. The court concluded that the agreement was fair and reasonable to the company’s members, and that the transaction would benefit the company and its members. The court also found that the directors had acted in good faith and in the best interests of the company. Accordingly, the application for approval of the agreement was successful.

Justice Byrne approved the One Diversified (Aust) Pty Ltd Queen’s Wharf Project Agreement, allowing the development of the mixed-use precinct on the Brisbane River to proceed. The court's decision was based on the finding that the agreement was in the best interests of the company’s members and that the requirements of section 232 of the Corporations Act 2001 were satisfied. The approval of the agreement would facilitate the development of the project, which was expected to bring significant economic benefits to the region.

One Diversified (Aust) Pty Ltd

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established