Silbermann v One.Tel Limited (in liquidation) and anor [2005] NSWIRComm 477
It is arguably open to conclude that the AMEX corporate card contract is a collateral arrangement or related condition to the employment contract within the meaning of s 106(2A) of the Industrial Relations Act 1996, and thus there is an arguable legal foundation to proceed; the notice of motion to strike out is dismissed.
- Parties
- Applicant: Mark Silbermann; Applicant: Bema Pty Ltd; Respondent: One.Tel Limited (in liquidation); Respondent: American Express International Inc
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 23 December 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Application Under S 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Notice of Motion to Strike Out Claim
- Outcome
- notice of motion dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Unfair Contract, Collateral Arrangement, Strike Out Application, Employment Contract, Jurisdiction, Costs Order
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Mark Silbermann
Applicant
Bema Pty Ltd
Applicant
One.Tel Limited (in liquidation)
Respondent
American Express International Inc
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application Under S 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Notice of Motion to Strike Out Claim
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the AMEX corporate card contract is a collateral arrangement or related condition to the employment contract for the purposes of s 106(2A)
- 2 Whether the jurisdiction to declare contracts void or varied extends to this arrangement
- 3 Whether there is an arguable legal foundation to proceed against the second respondent
Ratio Decidendi
It is arguably open to conclude that the AMEX corporate card contract is a collateral arrangement or related condition to the employment contract within the meaning of s 106(2A) of the Industrial Relations Act 1996, and thus there is an arguable legal foundation to proceed; the notice of motion to strike out is dismissed.
Court Disposition
notice of motion dismissed
Orders
- The notice of motion is dismissed
- The second respondent is to pay any legal professional costs properly incurred by the applicants in relation to this notice of motion in an amount assessed in default of agreement
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment