Domanko v Chloer Pty Limited (In Liquidation) formerly Business Catalyst International Pty Limited and another [2005] NSWIRComm 384

Domanko v Chloer Pty Limited (In Liquidation) formerly Business Catalyst International Pty Limited and another [2005] NSWIRComm 384

While some deficiencies were found in the applicant's pleadings, particularly regarding the connection between certain promises (e.g. new pay structure and share units) and the impugned contract, the overall disclosure of facts was just sufficient to establish a reasonable cause of action against the second respondent. However, because the first respondent is in liquidation, leave from the Supreme Court is required to proceed, and without such leave, any orders related to the contract or against the second respondent cannot be made. The applicant is granted leave to amend the summons to address deficiencies, and the matter is listed for further directions.

Parties
Applicant (respondent on Motion): Robert Domanko; First Respondent: Chloer Pty Limited (In Liquidation), formerly Business Catalyst International Pty Limited; Second Respondent (applicant on Motion): Zia Qureshi
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 October 2005
Procedural Posture
Application Under Section 106 of Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Interlocutory Proceedings (decision on Notice of Motion to Dismiss/stay Proceedings Against Second Respondent)
Outcome
Leave to amend summons granted; matter listed for directions; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Unfair Contract, Jurisdiction, Pleadings, Liquidation, Leave to Proceed Against Company in Liquidation
Industrial Relations Employment Law Corporations Law Unfair Contract Jurisdiction Pleadings Liquidation Leave to Proceed Against Company in Liquidation

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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Domanko

Applicant (respondent on Motion)

Chloer Pty Limited (In Liquidation), formerly Business Catalyst International Pty Limited

First Respondent

Zia Qureshi

Second Respondent (applicant on Motion)

Procedural Posture

Application Under Section 106 of Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Interlocutory Proceedings (decision on Notice of Motion to Dismiss/stay Proceedings Against Second Respondent)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's pleadings disclose a reasonable cause of action for unfair contract under s 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the second respondent had a sufficient connection to the impugned contract to enable relief to be granted against him
  3. 3 Whether the proceedings against the second respondent are futile in light of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 500(2) requirement for leave to proceed against a company in liquidation

Ratio Decidendi

While some deficiencies were found in the applicant's pleadings, particularly regarding the connection between certain promises (e.g. new pay structure and share units) and the impugned contract, the overall disclosure of facts was just sufficient to establish a reasonable cause of action against the second respondent. However, because the first respondent is in liquidation, leave from the Supreme Court is required to proceed, and without such leave, any orders related to the contract or against the second respondent cannot be made. The applicant is granted leave to amend the summons to address deficiencies, and the matter is listed for further directions.

Court Disposition

Leave to amend summons granted; matter listed for directions; costs reserved.

Orders

  • The applicant is given leave to file and serve an amended summons for relief.
  • Matter listed for directions at 9.45 am on Friday 11 November 2005 for applicant to advise intentions, including regarding leave under s 500(2) of the Corporations Act, amending the claim, and conciliation in relation to the second respondent.