Tasman Capital Pty Ltd v Sinclair & Anor [2008] NSWCA 248

Tasman Capital Pty Ltd v Sinclair & Anor [2008] NSWCA 248

The Letter of 28 May 2001 constituted a binding agreement for payment and employment, immediately effective despite anticipation of further agreements. The Deed was not intended to create enforceable loan obligations and was for accounting purposes. The trial judge did not err in her findings. Damages for wrongful dismissal are prima facie measured by lost salary and benefits, and the onus to prove offsetting income or avoided loss falls on the employer; lack of evidence of such offset permitted the award based on salary alone.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 October 2008
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
['binding Agreement' 'agreement to Be Supplemented or Refined' 'wrongful Dismissal' 'damages' 'onus of Proof for Mitigation and Avoided Loss']
['contract' 'employment'] ['binding Agreement' 'agreement to Be Supplemented or Refined' 'wrongful Dismissal' 'damages' 'onus of Proof for Mitigation and Avoided 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

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a binding agreement was made under the Letter of 28 May 2001 and could be immediately enforced' 'Whether the Deed of Loan dated 25 July 2001 was enforceable according to its terms or was merely for accounting purposes' 'Proper assessment of damages for wrongful dismissal and the onus of proof in relation to avoided and avoidable loss']

Ratio Decidendi

The Letter of 28 May 2001 constituted a binding agreement for payment and employment, immediately effective despite anticipation of further agreements. The Deed was not intended to create enforceable loan obligations and was for accounting purposes. The trial judge did not err in her findings. Damages for wrongful dismissal are prima facie measured by lost salary and benefits, and the onus to prove offsetting income or avoided loss falls on the employer; lack of evidence of such offset permitted the award based on salary alone.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed with costs']