Adler Mallach Holdings Pty Limited v Robertson and anor [2002] NSWSC 1176

Adler Mallach Holdings Pty Limited v Robertson and anor [2002] NSWSC 1176

The Plaintiff proved loss of profits of $704,435 through accepted expert accounting evidence, and that loss was caused by the First Defendant's competing business and solicitation of the Plaintiff's customers, assisted by the Second Defendant. The claimed separate springboard or headstart damages were not available on the facts and would duplicate the assessed loss of profits, while the remaining claimed heads of damage were not established or were too remote. Damages were therefore assessed against both Defendants only for loss of profits in the sum of $704,435.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 December 2002
Procedural Posture
Assessment of Damages in Equity Division Proceedings Concerning Solicitation of Customers of a Business Sold to the Plaintiff / Inquiry by Master After Judgment for the Plaintiff Against Both Defendants for Damages to Be Assessed
Outcome
Damages assessed in favour of the Plaintiff against both Defendants in the sum of $704,435; liberty to apply reserved as to costs of the inquiry and generally.
Legal Topics
['assessment of Damages' 'loss of Profits' 'sale of Business' 'solicitation of Customers' 'restraint Provisions' 'unfair Springboard or Headstart' 'wasted Management Time' 'aggravated and Exemplary Damages']
['damages' 'contract' 'equity'] ['assessment of Damages' 'loss of Profits' 'sale of Business' 'solicitation of Customers' 'restraint Provisions' 'unfair Springboard or Headstart' 'wasted Management Time' 'aggravated and Exemplary Damages']

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

Assessment of Damages in Equity Division Proceedings Concerning Solicitation of Customers of a Business Sold to the Plaintiff / Inquiry by Master After Judgment for the Plaintiff Against Both Defendants for Damages to Be Assessed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Master had jurisdiction to conduct the inquiry as to damages and whether an order for damages to be assessed was required.' "Whether the Plaintiff proved loss of profits caused by the Defendants' conduct." 'Whether a separate head of damages should be allowed for an unfair springboard or headstart after the restraint period.' 'Whether damages should be awarded for wasted management time, inability to hedge against currency fluctuations, inability to expand business operations, and aggravated or exemplary damages.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Plaintiff proved loss of profits of $704,435 through accepted expert accounting evidence, and that loss was caused by the First Defendant's competing business and solicitation of the Plaintiff's customers, assisted by the Second Defendant. The claimed separate springboard or headstart damages were not available on the facts and would duplicate the assessed loss of profits, while the remaining claimed heads of damage were not established or were too remote. Damages were therefore assessed against both Defendants only for loss of profits in the sum of $704,435.

Court Disposition

Damages assessed in favour of the Plaintiff against both Defendants in the sum of $704,435; liberty to apply reserved as to costs of the inquiry and generally.

Orders

  • ['Upon inquiry, I assess the damages in favour of the Plaintiff against the First Defendant and the Second Defendant in the sum of $704,435.' 'I reserve to the parties liberty to apply to Acting Justice Brownie (or, if he not be available, the Duty Judge in the Equity Division) in respect to the costs of the inquiry...