Kerrisk v DC Holdings WA Pty Limited [2013] FCA 1217

Kerrisk v DC Holdings WA Pty Limited [2013] FCA 1217

Summary judgment is inappropriate as there are arguable questions of fact and law as to whether the applicants are independent contractors for purposes of the IC Act and whether they provided services to the respondent under the FSA, such that the definition of 'services contract' may be satisfied.

Parties
Applicant: Peter Kerrisk; Applicant: Mindil Corp Pty Limited ACN 627 665 719; Respondent: DC Holdings WA Pty Limited ACN 136 640 330
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Summary Judgment Sought; Determination on Application
Outcome
summary judgment application dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Independent Contractor, Services Contract, Fair and Harsh Contracts
Practice and Procedure Contract Law Employment Law Summary Judgment Independent Contractor Services Contract Fair and Harsh Contracts

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 6 Authorities cited 31 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Kerrisk

Applicant

Mindil Corp Pty Limited ACN 627 665 719

Applicant

DC Holdings WA Pty Limited ACN 136 640 330

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Summary Judgment Sought; Determination on Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Facilities and Service Agreement (FSA) is a 'services contract' under s 5 of the Independent Contractors Act 2006 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether the applicants have no reasonable prospect of successfully prosecuting the proceeding
  3. 3 Whether mixed questions of law and fact preclude summary judgment

Ratio Decidendi

Summary judgment is inappropriate as there are arguable questions of fact and law as to whether the applicants are independent contractors for purposes of the IC Act and whether they provided services to the respondent under the FSA, such that the definition of 'services contract' may be satisfied.

Court Disposition

summary judgment application dismissed

Orders

  • The interlocutory application of the respondent filed 27 September 2013 for summary judgment be dismissed.
  • The respondent pay the costs of the applicants to be taxed if not agreed.