Stratis v Reckon Limited [2003] FCA 355

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Stratis v Reckon Limited [2003] FCA 355 KATHIE STRATIS v RECKON LIMITED & ORS N 322 of 2000 WHITLAM J 24 APRIL 2003 SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 322 of 2000

BETWEEN: KATHIE STRATIS

APPLICANT

AND: RECKON LIMITED

FIRST RESPONDENT

PHIL HAYMAN

SECOND RESPONDENT

GREG WILKINSON

THIRD RESPONDENT

STEVE RICKWOOD

FOURTH RESPONDENT

JUDGE: WHITLAM J

DATE OF ORDER: 24 APRIL 2003

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The proceeding is dismissed with costs. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 322 of 2000

BETWEEN: KATHIE STRATIS

APPLICANT

AND: RECKON LIMITED

FIRST RESPONDENT

PHIL HAYMAN

SECOND RESPONDENT

GREG WILKINSON

THIRD RESPONDENT

STEVE RICKWOOD

FOURTH RESPONDENT

JUDGE: WHITLAM J

DATE: 24 APRIL 2003

PLACE: SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Introduction 1 The applicant, Kathie Stratis, used to be employed by the first respondent, Reckon Limited ("Reckon"). In this proceeding she seeks an order setting aside part of a deed whereunder she was granted a number of options over shares in Reckon. The document in question was executed on 11 June 1999 in the course of preparations for an initial public offering of shares by Reckon. It was signed on behalf of Reckon by the second respondent, Phil Hayman, and the fourth respondent, Steve Rickwood. Mr Hayman, Mr Rickwood and the third respondent, Greg Wilkinson, were directors of Reckon at that time. Ms Stratis also claims to have suffered loss and damage as a result of allegedly misleading and deceptive representations made by these individual respondents and by two of Reckon's professional advisers prior to her execution of this document.