Charltons CJC Pty Ltd v Fitzgerald (No 2) [2013] NSWSC 958

Charltons CJC Pty Ltd v Fitzgerald (No 2) [2013] NSWSC 958

It is appropriate to grant declarations for both breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty arising from the same conduct, as remedies may differ, and damages might be assessed according to equitable compensation principles in a separate hearing. De minimis principle should not be applied given the long-term impact of client cultivation and the potential value of reasonably estimated future fees. Declarations are made for breaches and inferences may be drawn from unexplained evidence and defendants' failure to testify.

Parties
Plaintiff: Charltons CJC Pty Ltd; First Defendant: Alden Gregory Fitzgerald; Second Defendant: Kamal Kishore; Third Defendant: Kirat Krishan Prasad; Fourth Defendant: Intuitive Accountants & Associates Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 August 2013
Procedural Posture
Restraint of Trade, Employment Law, Equity / Consequential Orders Following Breach Findings; Pre Damages Hearing
Outcome
Declarations as sought by plaintiff for breaches; parties to deliver agreed orders within 10 days; defendants to pay 75% of plaintiff's costs of hearing.
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Restraint of Trade, Declaratory Relief, Equitable Compensation, De Minimis Principle
Employment Law Equity Contract Law Breach of Contract Breach of Fiduciary Duty Restraint of Trade Declaratory Relief Equitable Compensation +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charltons CJC Pty Ltd

Plaintiff

Alden Gregory Fitzgerald

First Defendant

Kamal Kishore

Second Defendant

Kirat Krishan Prasad

Third Defendant

Intuitive Accountants & Associates Pty Ltd

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Restraint of Trade, Employment Law, Equity / Consequential Orders Following Breach Findings; Pre Damages Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether concurrent breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty arises from the same conduct
  2. 2 Whether de minimis principle applies to minor breaches in client cultivation
  3. 3 Scope of orders relating to third defendant Prasad

Ratio Decidendi

It is appropriate to grant declarations for both breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty arising from the same conduct, as remedies may differ, and damages might be assessed according to equitable compensation principles in a separate hearing. De minimis principle should not be applied given the long-term impact of client cultivation and the potential value of reasonably estimated future fees. Declarations are made for breaches and inferences may be drawn from unexplained evidence and defendants' failure to testify.

Court Disposition

Declarations as sought by plaintiff for breaches; parties to deliver agreed orders within 10 days; defendants to pay 75% of plaintiff's costs of hearing.

Orders

  • Declarations for breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty in respect of specified conduct and parties.
  • Orders 45 and 46 confined to post-employment conduct regarding third defendant Prasad.