Ace Business Brokers Pty Ltd v Phillips-Treby [2000] NSWIRComm 163

Ace Business Brokers Pty Ltd v Phillips-Treby [2000] NSWIRComm 163

The agent appellants, by making representations without proper foundation and inducing the respondents to enter the unfair contract, had a sufficiently direct and blameworthy connection with the making of the contract and the resulting loss. The exercise of discretion to impose joint and several liability for the franchise fee under s 106(5) was correct and just in the circumstances. No error in principle or discretion was established to warrant appellate intervention.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 August 2000
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal / Full Bench Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
['unfair Contracts' 'agency Liability' 'franchise Agreements' 'restitution' 'monetary Orders']
['industrial Law' 'contract'] ['unfair Contracts' 'agency Liability' 'franchise Agreements' 'restitution' 'monetary Orders']

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 for Leave to Appeal and Appeal / Full Bench Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether agent may be held jointly and severally liable for payment of money under s 106(5) of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 in connection with an unfair contract induced by agent's misrepresentations" "Appropriate exercise of Commission's discretion in making monetary orders against a business agent for loss arising from an avoided contract" "Proper test for 'connection' under s 106(5) for orders against non-parties"]

Ratio Decidendi

The agent appellants, by making representations without proper foundation and inducing the respondents to enter the unfair contract, had a sufficiently direct and blameworthy connection with the making of the contract and the resulting loss. The exercise of discretion to impose joint and several liability for the franchise fee under s 106(5) was correct and just in the circumstances. No error in principle or discretion was established to warrant appellate intervention.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal is granted.' 'Appeal is dismissed.' "Appellants are to pay respondents' costs."]