[2025] FWC 2685
Citation: [2025] FWC 2685
What happened
Qube Logistics (Rail) Pty Ltd sought to vary two enterprise agreements, the QUBE Logistics (Rail) Train Crew and RTBU NSW Enterprise Agreement 2015 and the QUBE Logistics (Rail) Train Crew NSW Enterprise Agreement 2019. They argued the agreements were ambiguous and didn't reflect the common intention of Qube, the RTBU, and employees. A Deputy President initially dismissed the application, citing lack of standing for the 2015 agreement and failing to establish the common intention. Qube appealed, but the Full Bench dismissed the appeal. Qube then sought constitutional writs in the Federal Court, which quashed the Full Bench's decision and ordered the Commission to rehear Qube’s application. The dispute centered on findings regarding a meeting in January 2014 and the credibility of witnesses, including Mr Rich, Mr Johnson, Mr Coulton and Mr Pryor.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission Deputy President granted an application for recusal. The Deputy President found that Qube Logistics' submission that a fair-minded lay observer might reasonably apprehend bias was well-founded. The Deputy President was previously required to make factual findings about the same issues, including the credibility of witnesses, and the Full Court found the Deputy President did not adequately consider Qube’s submissions. The Full Court ordered the Commission to rehear Qube’s application to vary the 2019 agreement.
What it means for employers
Employers should be aware that previous findings of fact in litigation can create an apprehension of bias in subsequent proceedings. Thoroughly consider the potential for bias when seeking variations to enterprise agreements, especially when prior disputes have occurred.
What it means for employees
Employees should be aware that disputes regarding enterprise agreements can be complex and involve multiple legal avenues. The process can be lengthy, and decisions can be overturned and reheard.
Every statement above is drawn from the published decision. Read the original here:
https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/pdf/2025fwc2685.pdfWant more cases like this?
FairWork Mate tracks Fair Work Ombudsman, Fair Work Commission and Federal Court decisions across Australia. The full dataset, with structured fields for awards cited, industry, penalty amounts and affected employee counts, is available through the Business API. FairWork Mate AI answers plain-English questions grounded on the full corpus.
Individual case summaries on this site are free. API + AI access is a paid product. Contact us for pricing or a 50% off first month.
Get notified on new Fair Work cases
Free email alerts when we publish new underpayment decisions, penalty orders, and workplace law updates.
Free forever. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
This summary was drafted by AI from the published decision and reviewed before publishing. It is general information, not legal advice. For your specific situation, speak to the Fair Work Ombudsman (13 13 94) or a qualified lawyer. About these summaries & corrections →