Curtin v University of New South Wales [2008] NSWSC 586
The Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW) and Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) claims were summarily dismissed because the pleaded particulars concerned internal matters between the plaintiff and defendants about the plaintiff's employment, and binding authority meant that context could not be characterised as conduct in trade or commerce. The Contracts Review Act 1980 (NSW) claim was summarily dismissed because the plaintiff relied on matters preceding execution of the Deed of Release and challenged its validity, so the claim did not fall within s 16(b) or s 16(c) and was clearly brought out of time. Other claims were not otherwise summarily dismissed on the applications.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 13 June 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Common Law Division Proceedings Involving Claims Arising From Employment Termination, Retrenchment and a Deed of Release / Interlocutory Notices of Motion for Summary Dismissal and Separate Determination
- Outcome
- Claims for relief pursuant to the Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW), the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) and the Contracts Review Act 1980 (NSW) dismissed; costs of the applications for summary dismissal reserved; plaintiff's notice of motion stood over generally with liberty to apply; exhibits returned.
- Legal Topics
- ['summary Dismissal' 'deed of Release' 'trade or Commerce' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'unconscionable Conduct' 'contracts Review Act Limitation Periods' 'misfeasance in Public Office' 'negligence' 'equitable Rescission']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Common Law Division Proceedings Involving Claims Arising From Employment Termination, Retrenchment and a Deed of Release / Interlocutory Notices of Motion for Summary Dismissal and Separate Determination
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether claims under the Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW) and the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) should be summarily dismissed because the alleged conduct was not in trade or commerce.' 'Whether the claim under the Contracts Review Act 1980 (NSW) was brought outside the limitation period in s 16.' 'Whether other claims, including contract claims and a claim for equitable rescission of the Deed of Release, should be summarily dismissed.' 'Whether the misfeasance in public office claim against the third defendant should be dealt with by summary dismissal or pleading amendment.']
Ratio Decidendi
The Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW) and Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) claims were summarily dismissed because the pleaded particulars concerned internal matters between the plaintiff and defendants about the plaintiff's employment, and binding authority meant that context could not be characterised as conduct in trade or commerce. The Contracts Review Act 1980 (NSW) claim was summarily dismissed because the plaintiff relied on matters preceding execution of the Deed of Release and challenged its validity, so the claim did not fall within s 16(b) or s 16(c) and was clearly brought out of time. Other claims were not otherwise summarily dismissed on the applications.
Court Disposition
Claims for relief pursuant to the Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW), the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) and the Contracts Review Act 1980 (NSW) dismissed; costs of the applications for summary dismissal reserved; plaintiff's notice of motion stood over generally with liberty to apply; exhibits returned.
Orders
- ['The claims for relief made pursuant to the Fair Trading Act 1987, the Trade Practices Act 1974 and the Contracts Review Act 1980 are dismissed.' 'The costs of the applications for summary dismissal are reserved.' "The plaintiff's Notice of Motion is stood over generally with liberty to apply." 'The exhibits may be...
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