Lehmann v Winning Time Pty Ltd [2009] FCA 724

Lehmann v Winning Time Pty Ltd [2009] FCA 724

Settlement approved under s 33V since all 19 group members were individually advised, consented expressly, and the settlement figure is justified by the risks, complexity, and range of potential damages.

Parties
Applicant: Christopher John Lehmann; Applicant: Peter Urban; First Respondent: Winning Time Pty Ltd (ACN 052 442 494); Second Respondent: Stelios Angelodemou; Third Respondent: Chrissy Angelodemou; Fourth Respondent: EPI Pty Ltd (ACN 080 249 252)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 June 2009
Procedural Posture
Representative Proceeding / Settlement Approval
Outcome
Settlement approved; proceedings between applicant and first, second and third respondents dismissed with right of reinstatement.
Legal Topics
Representative Proceedings, Settlement Approval
Practice and Procedure Representative Proceedings Settlement Approval

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher John Lehmann

Applicant

Peter Urban

Applicant

Winning Time Pty Ltd (ACN 052 442 494)

First Respondent

Stelios Angelodemou

Second Respondent

Chrissy Angelodemou

Third Respondent

EPI Pty Ltd (ACN 080 249 252)

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Representative Proceeding / Settlement Approval

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Should the Court approve settlement of a representative proceeding as fair and reasonable under s 33V of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth)?
  2. 2 Should the Court look behind express agreement of all members of the representative group when considering settlement approval?

Ratio Decidendi

Settlement approved under s 33V since all 19 group members were individually advised, consented expressly, and the settlement figure is justified by the risks, complexity, and range of potential damages.

Court Disposition

Settlement approved; proceedings between applicant and first, second and third respondents dismissed with right of reinstatement.

Orders

  • Settlement approved in accordance with Terms of Settlement (exhibit KW2 to affidavit of Kim Whitby sworn 30 June 2009).
  • Proceedings between applicant and first, second and third respondents dismissed with right of reinstatement (as per Terms of Settlement).