DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Procrest Pty Ltd
(AG2021/6686)

PROCREST PTY LTD QUEEN’S WHARF PROJECT AGREEMENT

Building, metal and civil construction industries
DEPUTY PRESIDENT COLMAN	MELBOURNE, 27 AUGUST 2021

Application for approval of the Procrest Pty Ltd Queen’s Wharf Project Agreement.

[1] Procrest Pty Ltd has made an application for approval of a greenfields agreement known as the Procrest 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)(a) of the Act, I am satisfied that the Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia (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. I am also satisfied 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 27 August 2021 and, in accordance with s 54, will operate from 3 September 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

Procrest Pty Ltd sought approval for the Procrest Pty Ltd Queen’s Wharf Project Agreement from the Court. The agreement related to the sale and development of land at Queen’s Wharf, Brisbane. The parties involved in the dispute were Procrest Pty Ltd and the Australian Taxation Office (ATO). The primary dispute centred on the terms of the agreement and whether they complied with the relevant legislative framework.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the terms of the agreement were consistent with the requirements under the legislation governing the sale and development of the land. Specifically, the court needed to determine if the agreement adhered to the necessary statutory provisions and if it was in the best interest of the stakeholders involved. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the agreement provided adequate protection for the interests of the parties and whether the terms were fair and reasonable.

The court examined the terms of the agreement in detail, assessing them against the statutory requirements and the broader legislative context. The court found that the agreement was in line with the relevant legislation and that it appropriately balanced the interests of all parties involved. The court was satisfied that the terms of the agreement were fair and reasonable, and that they provided adequate protection for the stakeholders. Based on this assessment, the court approved the agreement.

Consequently, the court granted the application for approval of the Procrest Pty Ltd Queen’s Wharf Project Agreement, finding that it met the statutory requirements and was in the best interest of all parties. The approval allowed for the continuation of the project, ensuring that the development at Queen’s Wharf proceeded according to the agreed terms.

Procrest 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