Eslick v Exben Pty Ltd and ors [2001] NSWIRComm 68

Eslick v Exben Pty Ltd and ors [2001] NSWIRComm 68

Although an applicant ordinarily chooses the parties against whom to proceed and no claim was made by Mr Eslick against Marco Belgiorno-Zegna, Marco had made representations concerning Mr Eslick's continued employment, was a director or managing director of relevant Transfield entities, was a party to the MOU, and appeared to have a central and real connection with the arrangements and events leading to the termination of Mr Eslick's employment. It was therefore necessary and in the interests of justice to join him so the issues in the s 106 summons could be fully and properly resolved after all evidence was heard.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 January 2001
Procedural Posture
Application Under S 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Interlocutory Notice of Motion by the First to Eighth Respondents Seeking to Join Marco Belgiorno Zegna as a Respondent
Outcome
Motion granted; Marco Belgiorno-Zegna joined as a respondent; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['joinder of Parties' 'unfair Contracts Under S 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996' 'interlocutory Application' 'costs Reserved']
['industrial Relations' 'practice and Procedure'] ['joinder of Parties' 'unfair Contracts Under S 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996' 'interlocutory Application' 'costs Reserved']

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

Application Under S 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Interlocutory Notice of Motion by the First to Eighth Respondents Seeking to Join Marco Belgiorno Zegna as a Respondent

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales in Court Session had power to join Marco Belgiorno-Zegna as a respondent to s 106 proceedings on the application of existing respondents.' "Whether, despite the applicant's opposition and no claim being made by the applicant against Marco Belgiorno-Zegna, it was necessary and in the interests of justice to join him as a respondent." "Whether Marco Belgiorno-Zegna had a sufficient real connection with the alleged contract or arrangement and events leading to termination of Mr Eslick's employment to justify joinder."]

Ratio Decidendi

Although an applicant ordinarily chooses the parties against whom to proceed and no claim was made by Mr Eslick against Marco Belgiorno-Zegna, Marco had made representations concerning Mr Eslick's continued employment, was a director or managing director of relevant Transfield entities, was a party to the MOU, and appeared to have a central and real connection with the arrangements and events leading to the termination of Mr Eslick's employment. It was therefore necessary and in the interests of justice to join him so the issues in the s 106 summons could be fully and properly resolved after all evidence was heard.

Court Disposition

Motion granted; Marco Belgiorno-Zegna joined as a respondent; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['Marco Belgiorno-Zegna shall be joined as a respondent to the proceedings in Matter No IRC 1367 of 2000.' 'Costs are reserved.' 'This Matter is set down for further directions at 9.30 am on Thursday 1 February 2001.']