| [2018] FWCA 2557 |
| FAIR WORK COMMISSION |
DECISION |
Fair Work Act 2009
s.225—Enterprise agreement
Paint & Colour Coomera Pty Ltd T/A Inspirations Oxenford
(AG2018/1445)
NERANG PAINT CENTRE PTY LTD & PAINT AND COLOUR COOMERA PTY LTD (THE RETAILERS ASSOCIATION) MULTI-ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2009
Retail industry | |
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT HAMBERGER | SYDNEY, 8 MAY 2018 |
Termination of the Nerang Paint Centre Pty Ltd & Paint and Colour Coomera Pty Ltd (The Retailers Association) Multi-Enterprise Agreement 2009.
[1] On 13 April 2018, Paint & Colour Coomera Pty Ltd T/A Inspirations Oxenford applied for the termination of the Nerang Paint Centre Pty Ltd & Paint and Colour Coomera Pty Ltd (The Retailers Association) Multi-Enterprise Agreement 2009 (the Agreement), under s.225 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (the Act).
[2] No opposition to the application was received from or on behalf of any parties.
[3] Pursuant to s.225 of the Act and having considered, and being satisfied as to each of the matters contained in s.226 of the Act, the Agreement is terminated.
[4] The termination will come into effect from the date of this decision.
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT
Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer
<AE880717 PR606879>
- AGLC
- Paint and Colour Coomera Pty Ltd T/A Inspirations Oxenford [2018] FWCA 2557
- Case
- [2018] FWCA 2557
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the commission was whether there had been a fundamental change in the circumstances of the parties that warranted the termination of the agreement. The applicant argued that changes in the retail environment, including the rise of online shopping and increased competition, constituted a fundamental change. The respondent contended that the changes did not justify termination, as the agreement was still functioning effectively.
The commission examined the nature and extent of the changes in the retail environment and their impact on the parties' relationship. It considered whether the changes were significant enough to render the agreement unworkable or fundamentally different from what the parties had agreed upon. The commission found that while the retail environment had indeed changed, these changes did not amount to a fundamental change in the circumstances of the parties that would justify terminating the agreement. Consequently, the application for termination was dismissed.
The commission ordered that the multi-enterprise agreement remain in effect, and the parties were directed to continue operating under its terms. The decision underscored the importance of demonstrating a significant and fundamental change in circumstances to justify terminating an enterprise agreement.
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.