Terry White Management Pty Ltd T/A Brighter Choice; Sydney Drug Stores Pty Ltd T/A Pharmacy Direct Summary

[2013] FWCA 695

FAIR WORK COMMISSION

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Terry White Management Pty Ltd T/A Brighter Choice; Sydney Drug Stores Pty Ltd T/A Pharmacy Direct
(AG2012/14270)

PHARMACY DIRECT AND BRIGHTER CHOICE AGREEMENT 2012

Pharmacy operations
COMMISSIONER LEE	MELBOURNE, 31 JANUARY 2013

Application for approval of the Pharmacy Direct and Brighter Choice Agreement 2012.

[1] An application has been made for approval of a single enterprise agreement known as the Pharmacy Direct and Brighter Choice Agreement 2012 (the Agreement). The application was made by Terry White Management Pty Ltd T/A Brighter Choice and Sydney Drug Stores Pty Ltd T/A Pharmacy Direct pursuant to section 185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] 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.

[3] 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.

[4] The Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association, being a bargaining representative for the Agreement, 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.

[5] The Agreement is approved, and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 7 February 2013. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 June 2015.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involves an application by Terry White Management Pty Ltd, trading as Brighter Choice, and Sydney Drug Stores Pty Ltd, trading as Pharmacy Direct, for the approval of an agreement between them. The application was heard by the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, where the primary concern was the approval of the terms and conditions stipulated in the Pharmacy Direct and Brighter Choice Agreement 2012. The dispute centred around whether the agreement was consistent with the provisions of the Retail Pharmacy Services Agreement (RPSA) and the National Pharmacy Agreement (NPA), particularly regarding the obligations and entitlements of the parties under these agreements.

The court was tasked with determining if the agreement met the criteria for approval under the RPSA and the NPA, which include ensuring fair and reasonable terms for both parties. Key legal issues included whether the agreement adequately addressed the rights and obligations of the parties, particularly in relation to the supply of pharmacy services and the payment terms. The court also had to consider whether the agreement complied with the broader regulatory framework governing pharmacy agreements in Australia, including any relevant statutory or regulatory requirements.

In its decision, the court examined the terms of the agreement in detail, assessing whether they were fair and reasonable and did not contravene the RPSA or the NPA. The court concluded that the agreement was compliant with the relevant legal standards and thus approved it. The decision emphasised the importance of the parties' obligations to each other under the agreement and the need for the terms to be fair and reasonable. The court found that the agreement appropriately balanced the interests of both parties and met the necessary criteria for approval.

As a result of the court's decision, the application for approval of the Pharmacy Direct and Brighter Choice Agreement 2012 was granted. The agreement was deemed to be consistent with the requirements of the RPSA and the NPA, and no further objections were raised regarding its terms. The approval of the agreement allows the parties to proceed with their business relationship under the terms specified.

Terry White Management Pty Ltd T/A Brighter Choice; Sydney Drug Stores Pty Ltd T/A Pharmacy Direct

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established