Sidameneo (No 456) Pty Ltd v Alexander [2011] NSWCA 418

Sidameneo (No 456) Pty Ltd v Alexander [2011] NSWCA 418

While the appellant acquired goodwill sufficient to support a restrictive covenant, and the covenant was not unreasonable per se, the appellant failed to prove actual loss resulted from the breach. Healthscope was not liable for tortious interference as it reasonably believed the contracts were at an end.

Parties
Appellant: Sidameneo (No 456) Pty Ltd; First Respondent: Richard Spence Alexander; Second Respondent: Howard John Oxley; Third Respondent: Nicholas Robin Smith; Fourth Respondent: Mina Nakhla; Fifth Respondent: Healthscope Medical Centres Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed save as to reservation of costs below.
Legal Topics
Restrictive Covenants, Goodwill, Reasonableness of Restraint, Damages for Breach of Restraint, Tortious Interference With Contract, Public Policy
Restaint of Trade Contract Tort Restrictive Covenants Goodwill Reasonableness of Restraint Damages for Breach of Restraint Tortious Interference With Contract +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 42 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sidameneo (No 456) Pty Ltd

Appellant

Richard Spence Alexander

First Respondent

Howard John Oxley

Second Respondent

Nicholas Robin Smith

Third Respondent

Mina Nakhla

Fourth Respondent

Healthscope Medical Centres Pty Ltd

Fifth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What legitimate interest is required to support an enforceable restrictive covenant?
  2. 2 Did the appellant have such an interest in this case?
  3. 3 Was the restraint reasonable between the parties and in the public interest?

Ratio Decidendi

While the appellant acquired goodwill sufficient to support a restrictive covenant, and the covenant was not unreasonable per se, the appellant failed to prove actual loss resulted from the breach. Healthscope was not liable for tortious interference as it reasonably believed the contracts were at an end.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed save as to reservation of costs below.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed save that the question of costs below is reserved.
  • Appellant to pay the respondents' costs of the appeal.