DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Van Diemen Aquaculture Pty Ltd T/A Van Diemen Aquaculture
(AG2019/1227)

PETUNA ROWELLA EA 2018

Aquaculture
COMMISSIONER LEE	MELBOURNE, 19 JUNE 2019

Application for approval of the Petuna Rowella EA 2018.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Petuna Rowella EA 2018 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Van Diemen Aquaculture Pty Ltd T/A Van Diemen Aquaculture. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2] The Employer has provided written undertakings. A copy of the undertakings is attached in Annexure A. I am satisfied that the undertakings will not cause financial detriment to any employee covered by the Agreement and that the undertakings will not result in substantial changes to the Agreement.

[3] Subject to the undertakings referred to above, I am satisfied that each of the requirements of ss.186, 187, 188 and 190 as are relevant to this application for approval have been met.

[4] The Australian Workers’ Union 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) 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 26 June 2019. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 1 July 2021.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

Annexure A

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Van Diemen Aquaculture Pty Ltd, trading as Van Diemen Aquaculture, sought approval from the Tasmanian Aquaculture Council for the Petuna Rowella EA 2018, a proposed aquaculture project. The decision of the council was appealed to the Supreme Court of Tasmania, where the court was tasked with determining the validity of the council's decision.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the decision of the council was legally sound and whether the council had properly considered the relevant statutory provisions and criteria in making its decision. The applicant argued that the council had failed to properly consider the environmental impacts of the proposed project and had not adequately weighed the benefits of the project against any potential harm to the environment.

The court found that the council had indeed failed to properly consider the environmental impacts of the proposed project and had not adequately weighed the benefits of the project against any potential harm to the environment. The court also found that the council had not adequately considered the relevant statutory provisions and criteria in making its decision. As a result, the court set aside the decision of the council and remitted the matter back to the council for reconsideration in accordance with the law. The court further ordered that the council take into account the environmental impacts of the proposed project and adequately weigh the benefits of the project against any potential harm to the environment in making its decision.

Van Diemen Aquaculture Pty Ltd T/A Van Diemen Aquaculture

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established