Kennett and Anor v Mayrana Pty Ltd and Ors (No 9) [2008] NSWIRComm 106

Kennett and Anor v Mayrana Pty Ltd and Ors (No 9) [2008] NSWIRComm 106

The applicants each had oral consultancy agreements with the principal respondent to perform work after the sale of the College, at $65 per hour, which were brought to an end without proper notice. These contracts were found unfair, requiring variation to allow notice payments and outstanding remuneration for actual work performed. Broader money claims related to the sale and alleged unfair price, restraint, or employment on higher rates were not supported on the evidence and are not allowed. Claims against Mr Campbell and Mr Traynor personally are dismissed as no real connection to the contract or evidentiary basis for orders against them was established. Relief is offset by outstanding...

Parties
First Applicant: Keith Franklin Kennett; Second Applicant: KF Kennett Nominees Pty Limited (ACN 007 739 568); First Respondent: Mayrana Pty Ltd (ACN 101 363 688); Second Respondent: Garratt's Limited (ACN 000 003 725); Third Respondent: Christopher Campbell; Fourth Respondent: Michael Traynor; Applicant: Myong Ho Pak
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 May 2008
Procedural Posture
Application Under S 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Final Judgment After Trial
Outcome
The claims against Mr Campbell and Mr Traynor are dismissed. Both applicants' contracts are declared unfair and varied as to notice. Consequential money orders are to be made for established work performed and notice period, set off against outstanding moneys owed by Excelsior/Applicants. Final orders to be settled...
Legal Topics
Unfair Contracts, Employment Termination, Remuneration, Sale of Business, Restraint of Trade
Employment Law Industrial Law Unfair Contracts Employment Termination Remuneration Sale of Business Restraint of Trade

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 3 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Keith Franklin Kennett

First Applicant

KF Kennett Nominees Pty Limited (ACN 007 739 568)

Second Applicant

Mayrana Pty Ltd (ACN 101 363 688)

First Respondent

Garratt's Limited (ACN 000 003 725)

Second Respondent

Christopher Campbell

Third Respondent

Michael Traynor

Fourth Respondent

Myong Ho Pak

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Application Under S 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Final Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether oral or written employment contracts existed and were performed by the applicants after the sale of the College.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants’ contracts were unfair under s 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996.
  3. 3 Whether any money orders should be made and the proper respondent(s) for such orders.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants each had oral consultancy agreements with the principal respondent to perform work after the sale of the College, at $65 per hour, which were brought to an end without proper notice. These contracts were found unfair, requiring variation to allow notice payments and outstanding remuneration for actual work performed. Broader money claims related to the sale and alleged unfair price, restraint, or employment on higher rates were not supported on the evidence and are not allowed. Claims against Mr Campbell and Mr Traynor personally are dismissed as no real connection to the contract or evidentiary basis for orders against them was established. Relief is offset by outstanding...

Court Disposition

The claims against Mr Campbell and Mr Traynor are dismissed. Both applicants' contracts are declared unfair and varied as to notice. Consequential money orders are to be made for established work performed and notice period, set off against outstanding moneys owed by Excelsior/Applicants. Final orders to be settled...

Orders

  • Applicants to bring in short minutes reflecting the findings.
  • If parties cannot agree, each to file and serve proposed orders within 21 days for further directions.