Silbermann v One.Tel Limited (in liquidation) and anor [2005] NSWIRComm 477

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.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

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

  1. 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. 2 Whether the jurisdiction to declare contracts void or varied extends to this arrangement
  3. 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