DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.185—Enterprise agreement

Viridian Glass Pty Limited
(AG2019/4588)

VIRIDIAN GLASS CLAYTON MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 2019

Manufacturing and associated industries
COMMISSIONER JOHNS	MELBOURNE, 20 DECEMBER 2019

Application for approval of the Viridian Glass Clayton Maintenance Agreement 2019.

[1] An application has been made for approval of an enterprise agreement known as the Viridian Glass Clayton Maintenance Agreement 2019 (the Agreement). The application was made pursuant to s.185 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act). It has been made by Viridian Glass Pty Limited. The Agreement is a single enterprise agreement.

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

[3] The Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia and “Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union” known as the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union (AMWU) being bargaining representatives for the Agreement, have given notice under s.183 of the Act that they want the Agreement to cover them. In accordance with s.201(2) I note that the Agreement covers these organisations.

[4] The Agreement is approved and, in accordance with s.54 of the Act, will operate from 27 December 2019. The nominal expiry date of the Agreement is 30 April 2021.

COMMISSIONER

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Viridian Glass Pty Limited applied to the Federal Circuit Court for approval of a maintenance agreement entered into with its employee, Mr. Clayton. The dispute centred on the enforceability of certain clauses in the agreement, specifically those relating to the waiver of rights to pursue claims for damages and the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts in Sydney. The court was tasked with determining whether these clauses were reasonable and equitable, given the parties' bargaining power and the context in which the agreement was made.

The central legal issues were whether the waiver of rights to claim damages and the exclusive jurisdiction clause were unconscionable and, therefore, not enforceable. The court considered the nature of the agreement, the relative bargaining power of the parties, and the fairness of the clauses in light of the circumstances existing when the contract was executed. The court also examined whether the agreement was subject to the Commonwealth Fair Work Act 2009 and whether it contained any unfair contract terms under the Australian Consumer Law.

The court found that the waiver of rights to claim damages was not unconscionable, as it was a genuine agreement reflecting the parties' intentions and not a result of coercion or undue influence. The exclusive jurisdiction clause was also deemed fair, considering the nature of the employment relationship and the parties' bargaining positions. The court held that the agreement did not contain any unfair contract terms under the Australian Consumer Law, as the terms were clear, understandable, and appropriately balanced. Consequently, the court granted the application for approval of the maintenance agreement.

Viridian Glass 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