Full Bench`s decision concerned the appeal of a decision by Vice-President Barclay, which found that the Board was competent to rule on a Denern-related dispute over Dies in an expired and replaced enterprise agreement. His tribute was paid on the basis of a decision made by Vice-President Sams in the APESMA/NSW Electricity Networks Pty Limited t/a TransGrid 3 (TransGrid) case that, after a good swing (i.e. litigation during the entry into force of the agreement), “clear words would be necessary to remove an acquired right and that there were no such words.” Nevertheless, Section 51, paragraph 1, of the FW Act expressly stipulates that an enterprise agreement does not grant a person a right unless it is applicable to him. In 2014, Simplot entered into an enterprise agreement pursuant to Part 2-4 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Fth) (FW Act) which contained a clause allowing the FWC to settle and resolve the resulting disputes. In October 2018, the AMWU submitted a claim to the FWC for a dispute under this clause. Simplot`s “Full Bench” decision gives employers useful direction to understand where they are in relation to disputes raised in enterprise agreements that are no longer in force. A recent decision by a full-fledged Bank of the Commission for Fair Work1 resolved conflicting authorities and provided significant clarity on the limits of the Commission`s power to hear and determine disputes in enterprise agreements that are no longer in force (for example. B because they expired and were replaced by a new agreement). In such cases, parties wishing to make claims under the inconclusive agreement should sue in court if they are able to do so. Registered contracts apply until they are terminated or replaced. Whether this power remains when an agreement no longer applies to a particular employee (i.e.
because the contract is terminated or replaced by a new enterprise contract) has been the subject of different and conflicting authorities of the FWC and its predecessor. The three-year contract is an important step in creating a partnership between SPC and our employees to put the company in a more modern and flexible work organization. Vice-President Lawler also noted that another outcome would be to terminate an applicant`s “acquired right” to the applicant, which must survive the operation of an enterprise agreement. The nature of the law was not examined in detail by his tribute – in particular, it was not explained how a so-called acquired right to enter a dispute, in which the provision would not be applicable, even under the non-operational agreement, could have an essential utility in having an impact on the design of the legislation applicable to enterprise agreements.