Reginald Bruce Harding v Anton's Wire Products Pty Limited & Anor [2012] NSWDC 100

District Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Reginald Bruce Harding v Anton's Wire Products Pty Limited & Anor [2012] NSWDC 100 Hearing dates: 3-5 July 2012 Decision date: 20 July 2012 Jurisdiction: Civil Before: Mahony SC DCJ Decision: Verdict for the Defendants Verdict and Judgment for the CrossClaimants on the Cross-Claim Catchwords: Contract of service Legislation Cited: Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW) Cases Cited: Stevens v Brodribb Sawmilling Company Pty Limited (1986) 160 CLR 16 Lym International Pty Limited v Marcolongo [2011] NSWCA 303 County Securities Pty Limited v Challenger Group Holdings Pty Limited [2008] NSWCA 193 Waltons Stores (Interstate) Limited v Maher (1988) 164 CLR 387 Laws Holdings Pty Limited v Short (1972) 46 ALJR 563 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Reginald Bruce Harding - Plaintiff Anton's Wire Products Pty Limited - First Defendant Antonio Carnevale - Second Defendant Representation: S Hickey - Plaintiff R O'Neill - First & Second Defendants David Hooper Solicitors - Plaintiff McDonnell Schroder - First & Second Defendants File Number(s): 10/391052 Publication restriction: Nil

Judgment

The Plaintiff's Claim

1The plaintiff claims damages for breach of an agreement made on or about 9 July 2009 whereby the plaintiff alleges that he and the second defendant, Mr Antonio Carnevale, entered into an agreement for employment of the plaintiff by the first defendant, Anton's Wire Products Pty Limited ("Anton's"), as an advisor and sales coordinator. 2The agreement is alleged to be partly oral and partly comprised of a contract dated 9 July 2009 between the corporation known as Equipment Tech Pty Limited ("Equipment Tech"), of which the plaintiff was a director, and Anton's ("the Equipment Tech agreement"). The plaintiff pleaded that the agreement contained the following express terms: "a. That the plaintiff would be paid a yearly salary of $100,000 for three years; b. That the plaintiff would be paid a car allowance of $300 per week; c. That the plaintiff would be paid a commission of $7 per item on all orders obtained by the defendants for three years relating to the Equipment Tech intellectual property and stock; d. That the plaintiff would effect the transfer of the ownership of the Equipment Tech intellectual property and stock to Anton's; and e. That Anton's would pay $150,000 to Equipment Tech for the Equipment Tech intellectual property and stock. 3Alternatively, the plaintiff pleads that he was induced into the agreement by representations made by the second defendant, in or about the end of May 2009 and July 2009, that such representations were false and in reliance upon them, the plaintiff entered into the agreement. 4The plaintiff further pleads that on the same representations, and the plaintiff's reliance on them, the conduct of the second defendant was in contravention of s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (C'th) (the "TPA") or alternatively, s 42 of the Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW) (the "FTA"), in that the conduct was misleading or deceptive conduct or conduct likely to mislead or deceive in that the representations were false. In consequence of Anton's and/or the second defendant's breach of the TPA and/or the FTA, the plaintiff claims damages.