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

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

The plaintiff failed to prove any relevant offer and acceptance or agreement that he would be employed by Anton's. The Court accepted the evidence of Mr Keen, Mrs Carnevale and Mr Carnevale on the critical conversations, found the whole agreement was embodied in the 9 July 2009 Equipment Tech sale agreement, found the plaintiff's conduct after 9 July 2009 was not consistent with employment, and accepted that the 15 July 2009 letter was provided to assist the plaintiff obtain bank finance rather than as evidence of an employment contract. The alleged representations, misleading or deceptive conduct and estoppel claim therefore failed. On the cross-claim, the admitted $4,800 motor vehicle...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim for Damages for Alleged Breach of Employment Agreement, Misleading or Deceptive Conduct, and Cross Claim for Debts / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Verdict for the First and Second Defendants on the plaintiff's claim; verdict and judgment for the Cross-Claimants on the cross-claim in the sum of $4,800.00.
Legal Topics
['contract of Service' 'offer and Acceptance' 'partly Oral Agreement' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'promissory Estoppel' 'post Contractual Conduct' 'cross Claim']
['contract Law' 'employment Law' 'consumer Protection' 'equity' 'civil Procedure'] ['contract of Service' 'offer and Acceptance' 'partly Oral Agreement' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'promissory Estoppel' 'post Contractual Conduct' 'cross Claim']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Civil Claim for Damages for Alleged Breach of Employment Agreement, Misleading or Deceptive Conduct, and Cross Claim for Debts / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff and the second defendant agreed that the plaintiff would be employed by the first defendant for three years from 9 July 2009 as an advisor and sales coordinator.' 'Whether alleged representations by the second defendant induced the plaintiff to enter into the Equipment Tech agreement.' "Whether the second defendant's conduct was misleading or deceptive, or likely to mislead or deceive, in contravention of s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (C'th) or s 42 of the Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW)." 'Whether the plaintiff could recover on a promissory estoppel basis.' 'Whether the cross-claimants proved amounts claimed for a motor vehicle and a bending machine.']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff failed to prove any relevant offer and acceptance or agreement that he would be employed by Anton's. The Court accepted the evidence of Mr Keen, Mrs Carnevale and Mr Carnevale on the critical conversations, found the whole agreement was embodied in the 9 July 2009 Equipment Tech sale agreement, found the plaintiff's conduct after 9 July 2009 was not consistent with employment, and accepted that the 15 July 2009 letter was provided to assist the plaintiff obtain bank finance rather than as evidence of an employment contract. The alleged representations, misleading or deceptive conduct and estoppel claim therefore failed. On the cross-claim, the admitted $4,800 motor vehicle...

Court Disposition

Verdict for the First and Second Defendants on the plaintiff's claim; verdict and judgment for the Cross-Claimants on the cross-claim in the sum of $4,800.00.

Orders

  • ["Verdict for the First and Second Defendants on the Plaintiff's Claim." 'Plaintiff to pay the First and Second Defendants costs of the proceedings.' 'Verdict and Judgment for the Cross-Claimants on the Cross-Claim in the sum of $4,800.00.' 'Each party to pay his or its own costs of the Cross-Claim.' 'Liberty to...