ENTERPRISE AGREEMENTS – dispute about matter arising under agreement – s.739 Fair Work Act 2009 – application to deal with a dispute regarding income protection insurance under Kentz (Australia) P/L Ichtys Onshore Construction Greenfields Agreement – CEPU claimed Kentz were not paying income protection insurance to approved insurer within meaning of the clause – Kentz made arrangements with alternative insurer instead of insurers named in agreement – interpretation of clause and whether Kentz’s arrangements are compliant – Kentz referenced s.12 Insurance Act 1973 (Cth) that enables Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority to receive applications from bodies corporate – question of the meaning of phrase approved insurer – interpretation of enterprise agreement requires construction of words of the instrument [Golden Cockerel] – necessary to determine whether an agreement has a plain meaning or contains ambiguity – regard has to be made to the whole of the term and not only phrase ‘approved insurer’ – regard may be had to evidence of surrounding circumstances in determining whether an ambiguity exists – task of interpreting an agreement does not involve rewriting agreement to achieve fair or just outcome – plain meaning of clause requires Kentz to make income protection arrangements with an approved insurer – list is non-restrictive – Commission concluded insufficient material to express concluded view if a party desires to depart from named insurers listed. Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Kentz (Australia) P/L
…
