Ethell, Alison v Societe Generale Australia Ltd [1995] FCA 906

CATCHWORDS CONTRACT - Breach of Contract - breach of written "bonus" agreement - whether express term of employment - whether bonus scheme was a flexible arrangement - whether revenue based incentive scheme could be unilaterally varied from time to time - whether bank entitled to allocate profit way from profit centre - whether failure to dispute or protest variation meant applicant not entitled - whether entitled to believe difference in incentive payments would be paid - application of cancellation clause. BANKING - foreign exchange - swap transactions - bank's practice - dealers' commission TRADE PRACTICES - breach of s 52 of Trade Practices Act. Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) s 52 Prenn v Simmonds [1974] 1 WLR 1381 Utica City National Bank v Gunn (1918) 118 NE 607 Reardon Smith Line ltd v Hansen-Tangen [1976] 1 WLR 989 Codelfa Construction Pty Ltd v State Rail Authority of NSW (1982) 149 CLR 337 ALISON ETHELL v SOCIETE GENERALE AUSTRALIA LTD No G99 of 1994 Tamberlin J Sydney 13 November 1995

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA) NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY) No. G99 of 1994 GENERAL DIVISION ) BETWEEN: ALISON ETHELL Applicant AND: SOCIETE GENERALE AUSTRALIA LTD ACN 002 093 021 Respondent CORAM: TAMBERLIN J PLACE: SYDNEY DATED: 13 NOVEMBER 1995 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT Introduction In her Amended Application, Alison Ethell ("the applicant") claims from Societe Generale Australia Limited ("SGAL"), the sum of $786,685 for debt, or alternatively by way of damages, for breach of section 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), ("the Act"). There is a further alternative claim for breach of contract. Interests and costs are also claimed. The applicant's case is that in August 1991 SGAL agreed to employ her in the capacity of Corporate Foreign Exchange dealer. She was employed in that capacity up to mid-January 1993 when she left to take up employment with Indosuez Australia Limited.