Seidler v The University of New South Wales [2011] FCA 640

Seidler v The University of New South Wales [2011] FCA 640

The Deed of Release executed by the applicant operates as a comprehensive bar to all claims now raised, including those for conditions allegedly diagnosed after settlement. All claims arise out of the applicant's employment and education at the respondents, and were covered by the release. The applicant's Statement of Claim re-litigated matters already resolved in previous proceedings. As all claims fall within the ambit of the deed and previous findings, summary judgment was granted for the respondents under s 31A(2) of the Federal Court Act, and the Statement of Claim struck out as embarrassing and lacking reasonable cause of action.

Parties
Applicant: Kathryn Seidler; First Respondent: The University of New South Wales 'UNSW'; Second Respondent: The Australian Graduate School of Management 'AGSM'; Third Respondent: Vice-Chancellor Fred Hilmer; Fourth Respondent: Deputy Vice-Chancellor Richard Henry (now Professor Richard Henry); Fifth Respondent: Professor Ian Wilkinson; Sixth Respondent: Professor Paul Patterson; Seventh Respondent: Professor Pam Morrison; Eighth Respondent: Professor John Roberts
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Summary Judgment Application / Disposition of Applications for Summary Judgment and Strike Out
Outcome
Summary judgment granted for respondents; proceedings dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Deed of Release, Abuse of Process, Strike Out of Pleading, Disability Discrimination, Settlement Agreements, Employment Conditions, Victimisation, Breach of Contract, Fair Work Act, Trade Practices Act
Practice and Procedure Contract Law Employment Law Discrimination Law Summary Judgment Deed of Release Abuse of Process Strike Out of Pleading +7 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 5 Authorities cited 27 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kathryn Seidler

Applicant

The University of New South Wales 'UNSW'

First Respondent

The Australian Graduate School of Management 'AGSM'

Second Respondent

Vice-Chancellor Fred Hilmer

Third Respondent

Deputy Vice-Chancellor Richard Henry (now Professor Richard Henry)

Fourth Respondent

Professor Ian Wilkinson

Fifth Respondent

Professor Paul Patterson

Sixth Respondent

Professor Pam Morrison

Seventh Respondent

Professor John Roberts

Eighth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Summary Judgment Application / Disposition of Applications for Summary Judgment and Strike Out

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Deed of Release operates as a bar to the applicant's claims
  2. 2 Whether the proceedings constitute an abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether the Statement of Claim discloses a reasonable cause of action

Ratio Decidendi

The Deed of Release executed by the applicant operates as a comprehensive bar to all claims now raised, including those for conditions allegedly diagnosed after settlement. All claims arise out of the applicant's employment and education at the respondents, and were covered by the release. The applicant's Statement of Claim re-litigated matters already resolved in previous proceedings. As all claims fall within the ambit of the deed and previous findings, summary judgment was granted for the respondents under s 31A(2) of the Federal Court Act, and the Statement of Claim struck out as embarrassing and lacking reasonable cause of action.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted for respondents; proceedings dismissed

Orders

  • Judgment be entered for the Respondents pursuant to s 31A(2) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth)
  • The Applicant pay the Respondents' costs of the proceedings and of this motion