LUC DAIGLE v SCT OPERATIONS PTY LIMITED [2022] NSWDC 365
The District Court of NSW has jurisdiction to hear and determine the pleaded causes of action, including claims for equitable promissory estoppel and matters arising under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), as the relevant provisions do not confer exclusive jurisdiction on the Federal Court, and section 134(1)(h) of the District Court Act 1973 (NSW) applies to claims for equitable relief linked to the subject contract.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 04 August 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Procedural Ruling on Jurisdiction
- Outcome
- Jurisdiction confirmed
- Legal Topics
- ['jurisdiction' 'promissory Estoppel' 'conventional Estoppel' 'reasonable Notice of Termination']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Civil / Procedural Ruling on Jurisdiction
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the District Court of NSW has equitable jurisdiction to hear claims for promissory or conventional estoppel' 'Whether the District Court has jurisdiction in relation to matters arising under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)']
Ratio Decidendi
The District Court of NSW has jurisdiction to hear and determine the pleaded causes of action, including claims for equitable promissory estoppel and matters arising under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), as the relevant provisions do not confer exclusive jurisdiction on the Federal Court, and section 134(1)(h) of the District Court Act 1973 (NSW) applies to claims for equitable relief linked to the subject contract.
Court Disposition
Jurisdiction confirmed
Orders
- ['I determine that the New South Wales District Court has jurisdiction to hear all matters pleaded.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment