Surface to Air (Franchising) Pty Limited v Burns [2010] NSWSC 999

Surface to Air (Franchising) Pty Limited v Burns [2010] NSWSC 999

The proceeding failed because STAF did not prove that the Northern Beaches Airport Shuttle Bus business had passed to it, did not prove a concluded contract fixing its share of the consolidated business, did not prove what proportionate interest it had in the composite goodwill, did not prove that CAL or Mr Ince purchased the business, and did not prove loss, particularly in light of Mr Ince's offer to hand the business over to STAF.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 September 2010
Procedural Posture
Equity Division Proceeding Concerning Alleged Business Merger, Goodwill, Breach of Contract, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Misleading Conduct and Related Claims / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
The proceeding was dismissed, with STAF ordered to pay the costs of the third and fourth defendants except the costs of preparation of submissions, and liberty to those defendants to apply for indemnity costs.
Legal Topics
['goodwill' 'business Merger' 'alleged Sale of Business' 'breach of Contract' 'breach of Fiduciary Duty' 'dishonest Assistance' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'unconscionable Conduct' 'conspiracy' 'passing Off' 'equitable Compensation' 'proof of Loss']
['property' 'contract' 'equity' 'trade Practices and Fair Trading' 'torts'] ['goodwill' 'business Merger' 'alleged Sale of Business' 'breach of Contract' 'breach of Fiduciary Duty' 'dishonest Assistance' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'unconscionable Conduct' 'conspiracy' 'passing Off' 'equitable Compensation' 'proof of Loss']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Equity Division Proceeding Concerning Alleged Business Merger, Goodwill, Breach of Contract, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Misleading Conduct and Related Claims / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether STAF owned or had acquired the Northern Beaches Airport Shuttle Bus business before the alleged merger with the Northside Shuttle business.' 'Whether STAF and Mr and Mrs Burns concluded a binding agreement in February/March 2003 for a 50/50 merged business.' 'Whether STAF and Mr and Mrs Burns concluded a binding agreement on 12 May 2005 fixing interests in the business at 42.5% and 57.5%.' 'Whether Mr and Mrs Burns sold the consolidated Northside Shuttle business to CAL or Mr Ince for $250,000 or otherwise.' 'Whether CAL and Mr Ince were liable for misleading conduct, accessorial liability, dishonest assistance, conspiracy, interference with business or other pleaded causes of action.' 'Whether STAF proved any proportionate interest in the composite goodwill and any loss or damage.']

Ratio Decidendi

The proceeding failed because STAF did not prove that the Northern Beaches Airport Shuttle Bus business had passed to it, did not prove a concluded contract fixing its share of the consolidated business, did not prove what proportionate interest it had in the composite goodwill, did not prove that CAL or Mr Ince purchased the business, and did not prove loss, particularly in light of Mr Ince's offer to hand the business over to STAF.

Court Disposition

The proceeding was dismissed, with STAF ordered to pay the costs of the third and fourth defendants except the costs of preparation of submissions, and liberty to those defendants to apply for indemnity costs.

Orders

  • ['The proceeding be dismissed.' 'The plaintiff pay the costs of the third and fourth defendants, except the costs of preparation of submissions.' 'Liberty to the third and fourth defendants to apply for an order that the costs referred to in (2) above be on the indemnity basis.' 'If the third and fourth defendants...