Roohizadegan v TechnologyOne Limited (No 4) [2020] FCA 1729

Roohizadegan v TechnologyOne Limited (No 4) [2020] FCA 1729

Where parties agree to an indivisible lump sum for damages, without reserving a position as to interest, pre-judgment interest should be applied only from the date of their agreement rather than by a retrospective allocation, unless the agreement provides otherwise.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Damages Application / Post Judgment/pre Judgment Interest Determination
Outcome
Pre-judgment interest awarded in the quantum proposed by the Respondent
Legal Topics
['damages' 'pre Judgment Interest' 'breach of Contract']
['employment and Industrial Relations'] ['damages' 'pre Judgment Interest' 'breach of Contract']

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

Damages Application / Post Judgment/pre Judgment Interest Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether pre-judgment interest should be awarded on damages for forgone share options and breach of contract; calculation method and applicable period for pre-judgment interest given a lump sum damages agreement']

Ratio Decidendi

Where parties agree to an indivisible lump sum for damages, without reserving a position as to interest, pre-judgment interest should be applied only from the date of their agreement rather than by a retrospective allocation, unless the agreement provides otherwise.

Court Disposition

Pre-judgment interest awarded in the quantum proposed by the Respondent

Orders

  • ['The Applicant be awarded $35,370.90 in pre-judgment interest on his award for forgone share options.' 'The Applicant be awarded $68,862.09 in pre-judgment interest on his damages for breach of contract.']