Sydney Design and Developments Pty Ltd and Anor v Winter [2008] NSWIRComm 149

Sydney Design and Developments Pty Ltd and Anor v Winter [2008] NSWIRComm 149

The contract of 5 July 2004 was unfair as it unilaterally reduced agreed remuneration and permitted termination without notice; fairness required restoring the annual payment and providing a reasonable notice period. Mr Winter, though no longer a director, remained as General Manager and had culpable involvement in the events leading to the unfairness, justifying a money order against him.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 August 2008
Procedural Posture
Application Under S.106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Judgment After Ex Parte Hearing
Outcome
Contract found unfair and varied; money orders made against respondent.
Legal Topics
['unfair Contract' 'contract Variation' 'notice of Termination' 'remuneration' 'consequential Orders']
['industrial Law'] ['unfair Contract' 'contract Variation' 'notice of Termination' 'remuneration' 'consequential 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 Under S.106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Judgment After Ex Parte Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the July 2004 contract between the applicants and Armstrong Homes was unfair under s 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996' 'Whether consequential money orders should be made against Mr Winter' 'What variation and notice period should be imposed as a matter of fairness']

Ratio Decidendi

The contract of 5 July 2004 was unfair as it unilaterally reduced agreed remuneration and permitted termination without notice; fairness required restoring the annual payment and providing a reasonable notice period. Mr Winter, though no longer a director, remained as General Manager and had culpable involvement in the events leading to the unfairness, justifying a money order against him.

Court Disposition

Contract found unfair and varied; money orders made against respondent.

Orders

  • ['Agreement of 5 July 2004 varied to provide for an annual sum of $120,000 and a three month notice period or payment in lieu.' 'Money order of $10,000 against Mr Winter, plus interest at Supreme Court rates from termination to date of judgment.' 'Applicants to have a share of their costs borne by Mr Winter for the...