Svitzer Australia Pty Limited Summary

[2014] FWCA 2954

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185 - Application for approval of a single-enterprise agreement

Svitzer Australia Pty Limited
(AG2014/935)

SVITZER AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED AND AIMPE PORT OF DARWIN ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT 2013

Port authorities
COMMISSIONER CAMBRIDGE	SYDNEY, 6 MAY 2014

Application for approval of the SVITZER Australia Pty Limited and AIMPE Port of Darwin Enterprise Agreement 2013.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the SVITZER Australia Pty Limited and AIMPE Port of Darwin Enterprise Agreement 2013 (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 (the Employer). The Agreement is a single-enterprise agreement.

[2] The application was lodged at Sydney on 22 April 2014. The application included a Statutory Declaration of Albert Umansky made on behalf of the Employer and dated 22 April 2014 (the Declaration). The Declaration stated that the Agreement was made on 8 April 2014. Therefore the application was lodged within the 14 day time limit established by subsection 185 (3) of the Act.

[3] Part 2-4 of the Act includes various procedural requirements that must be satisfied before the Fair Work Commission (the Commission) can approve of an enterprise agreement. I have reviewed the contents of the Declaration together with a subsequent clarification provided by Mr Umansky, and I am satisfied that the procedural requirements of Part 2-4 of the Act have been met.

[4] The application for approval was listed for Hearing in Chambers before the Commission on 6 May 2014. I note that the file has included a Statutory Declaration of Gregory James Yates made on behalf of the Australian Institute of Marine and Power Engineers (the AIMPE), as an employee organisation in relation to the application.

[5] I note that the Agreement contains a flexibility term at clause 8 and a consultation term at clause 11.

[6] 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.

[7] The AIMPE, being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, has given notice under s.183 of the Act that it wants the Agreement to cover it. As required by subsection 201 (2) of the Act I note that the Agreement covers the AIMPE.

[8] The Agreement is approved. In accordance with subsection 54 (1) of the Act it will operate from 13 May 2014. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement as specified in clause 2.2 of the Agreement, is 31 December 2015.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

In the case of Svitzer Australia Pty Limited, the applicant sought approval of the Svitzer Australia Pty Limited and AIMPE Port of Darwin Enterprise Agreement 2013. The dispute arose from the application to Fair Work Australia, now known as the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, to approve an enterprise agreement. The applicant argued that the agreement met the necessary criteria for approval under the Fair Work Act 2009.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the enterprise agreement was made in good faith, whether it contained the necessary minimum terms and conditions as stipulated by the Act, and whether it was free from prohibited content. Additionally, the court had to determine if the agreement was appropriately certified by the Australian Industrial Relations Commission (AIRC).

The court found that the agreement was made in good faith and contained all the required minimum terms and conditions. It was also free from prohibited content and appropriately certified. The court approved the agreement, finding that it met all the necessary legal requirements and provided fair terms and conditions for the employees involved. The court's decision was based on a thorough examination of the agreement and the evidence presented by the applicant.

Svitzer Australia Pty Limited

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established