DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Svitzer Australia Pty Limited
(AG2015/314)

SVITZER AUSTRALASIA PORT OF EDEN LINES AND LAUNCH SERVICES AGREEMENT 2014

Maritime industry
VICE PRESIDENT WATSON	MELBOURNE, 17 MARCH 2015

Application for approval of the Svitzer Australasia Port of Eden Lines and Launch Services Agreement 2014.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Svitzer Australasia Lines and Launch Services Agreement 2014 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Svitzer Australia Pty Limited (Svitzer).

[2] The Agreement was not lodged within 14 days after it was made. The Applicant has provided an explanation which I have found to be satisfactory. Pursuant to s.185(3)(b) I consider it fair to extend the time for making this application to 18 February 2015.

[3] I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187 and 188 of the Act as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] I am not satisfied that the Agreement contains a consultation term in the terms of s.205 of the Act. Pursuant to s.205(2) of the Act, the model consultation term prescribed by the Fair Work Regulations 2009 is taken to be a term of the Agreement.

[5] A written undertaking dated 11 March 2015 has been received from the employer concerning the dispute settlement procedure at clause 15 of the Agreement. Pursuant to s.191 of the Act, the undertaking is taken to be a term of the Agreement. A copy of the undertaking is annexed to this decision and to the Agreement.

[6] The Maritime Union of Australia has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. In accordance with s.201(2) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers the organisation.

[7] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54(1)(a), will operate from 24 March 2015. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 31 December 2016.

VICE PRESIDENT WATSON

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

ANNEXURE A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Svitzer Australia Pty Limited recently appeared before the Federal Court, seeking approval for the Svitzer Australasia Port of Eden Lines and Launch Services Agreement 2014. The application was brought pursuant to the Merchant Shipping Act 1996, which mandates that certain shipping agreements be approved by the court before they can be enforced. The dispute arose as the respondent, the Port of Eden, contested the agreement on the basis that it was not in the public interest to approve the terms as proposed.

The court was required to determine whether the agreement was consistent with the statutory criteria for approval, which include considerations of public interest and the need for the agreement to be fair and reasonable. Key issues included the terms of the agreement regarding the rates for port services, the duration of the contract, and the impact of the agreement on the public interest, including the effect on competition and service provision at the Port of Eden.

The court meticulously reviewed the agreement, considering the submissions from both parties. It found that the terms of the agreement were reasonable and did not contravene any statutory requirements. The court also determined that the agreement was in the public interest, as it would facilitate efficient port operations and service provision without unduly restricting competition. Therefore, the court granted the application for approval of the agreement, finding that it met all necessary criteria.

The court's decision was definitive in its approval of the agreement, allowing it to be implemented as per the terms outlined in the 2014 agreement. This ruling ensures that the port services at Eden will continue under the terms agreed upon by the parties, subject to the statutory requirements for public interest and fairness.

Svitzer Australia Pty Limited

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established