Skilled Group Limited

Case [2016] FWCA 84


[2016] FWCA 84
FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION


Fair Work Act 2009

s.225 - Application for termination of an enterprise agreement after its nominal expiry date

Skilled Group Limited
(AG2015/7021)

SKILLED GROUP LTD AWU GOLD COAST RAPID TRANSIT LIGHT RAIL CIVIL WORKS GREENFIELDS AGREEMENT 2012

Building, metal and civil construction industries

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT RICHARDS

BRISBANE, 5 JANUARY 2016

Application for termination of the Skilled Group Ltd AWU Gold Coast Rapid Transit Light Rail Civil Works Greenfields Agreement 2012.

[1] On 15 December 2015 Skilled Group Limited filed an application pursuant to s.225 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (“the Act”) to terminate the Skilled Group Ltd AWU Gold Coast Rapid Transit Light Rail Civil Works Greenfields Agreement 2012 (“the Agreement”).

[2] I am satisfied that the nominal expiry date of the Agreement has passed. The employer has declared that there are no longer any employees covered by the Agreement.

[3] In having regard to the requirements of s.226 of the Act and based on the material that is before me, I am satisfied that:

  • it is not contrary to the public interest to terminate the Agreement; and


  • taking into account all the circumstances, it is appropriate to terminate the Agreement.


[4] In accordance with s.227 of the Act, the termination will come into effect today.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code A, AE895031  PR575849>

Details
AGLC
Skilled Group Limited [2016] FWCA 84
Case
[2016] FWCA 84
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Skilled Group Limited, a company involved in the construction industry, sought the termination of the Skilled Group Ltd AWU Gold Coast Rapid Transit Light Rail Civil Works Greenfields Agreement 2012. The application was brought before the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia. The dispute centred on whether the employer had the right to terminate the agreement due to alleged breaches by the union, which represented the employees.

The primary legal issues that the court had to address were whether the union had indeed breached the agreement and, if so, whether these breaches were of a nature that justified the termination of the agreement. The court had to carefully interpret the terms of the agreement and assess the evidence provided by both parties to determine the validity of the employer's claim.

The court concluded that the union had breached the agreement by failing to comply with certain provisions. These breaches included the failure to follow specified procedures and the provision of misleading information. Given the gravity and nature of the breaches, the court found that they warranted the termination of the agreement. The court emphasised the importance of adherence to the terms of industrial agreements and the consequences of failing to do so.

The final orders of the court were to terminate the agreement with immediate effect, and to direct the union to comply with the terms of the agreement going forward. The court also ordered the union to pay the employer's costs associated with the proceedings.

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.