Veolia Environmental Services (Australia) Pty Ltd

Case [2016] FWCA 67


[2016] FWCA 67

DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.210—Enterprise agreement
Veolia Environmental Services (Australia) Pty Ltd
(AG2015/7070)

VEOLIA AUSTRALIA & NEW ZEALAND ILLAWARRA INDUSTRIAL

SERVICES AGREEMENT 2015

Manufacturing and associated industries

COMMISSIONER RIORDAN SYDNEY, 5 JANUARY 2016

Application for variation of the Veolia Australia & New Zealand Illawarra Industrial Services

Agreement 2015.

[1]        An application has been made for approval of a variation to an enterprise agreement

known as the Veolia Australia & New Zealand Illawarra Industrial Services Agreement 2015

(the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.210 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the

Act). The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

[2]        The application seeks approval to vary clauses 17, 18 and 26 of the Agreement.

[3]        I am satisfied that each of the requirements of s.211 of the Act that are relevant to this

application for approval have been met.

[4]        The variation to the Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.216 of the Act,

will operate on and from 5 January 2016. The consolidated agreement, as varied, is attached

to this decision.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

<Price code G, AE412598 PR575775>

Details
AGLC
Veolia Environmental Services (Australia) Pty Ltd [2016] FWCA 67
Case
[2016] FWCA 67
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Veolia Environmental Services (Australia) Pty Ltd applied for approval of a variation to the Veolia Australia & New Zealand Illawarra Industrial Services Agreement 2015, under section 210 of the Fair Work Act 2009. The application sought to alter clauses 17, 18, and 26 of the agreement. The application was reviewed by Commissioner Riordan in Sydney on 5 January 2016.

The central legal issue for the court was whether the application met the requirements of section 211 of the Act, which outlines the criteria for approving variations to an enterprise agreement. Specifically, the court had to determine if the application adhered to the procedural and substantive requirements necessary for a valid variation.

Commissioner Riordan found that all relevant requirements of section 211 were satisfied. Consequently, the court approved the variation to the agreement, which would take effect from 5 January 2016. The consolidated agreement, incorporating the approved variations, was attached to the decision.

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.