Hurd v Zomojo Pty Ltd [2015] FCAFC 147

Hurd v Zomojo Pty Ltd [2015] FCAFC 147

None of the grounds of appeal in relation to apprehended bias, procedural unfairness, assignment of patent applications, finding of oppressiveness, exclusion of evidence, amendments to pleadings, or quantification of damages were made out; the findings of the trial judge as to breaches of contractual, fiduciary, and statutory duties, dismissal of the cross-claim, and the relief awarded were upheld. The applicant was granted an extension of time, but the appeal and the application for Constitutional writs were dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 October 2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal With Application for Extension of Time and Constitutional Writs
Outcome
Appeal and application for constitutional writs dismissed. Extension of time to appeal granted.
Legal Topics
["directors' Duties" 'fiduciary Duties' 'breach of Service Agreement' 'oppression Claim' 'injunctions' 'damages' 'apprehended Bias' 'procedural Fairness']
['corporations Law' 'equity' 'contract Law' 'intellectual Property'] ["directors' Duties" 'fiduciary Duties' 'breach of Service Agreement' 'oppression Claim' 'injunctions' 'damages' 'apprehended Bias' 'procedural Fairness']

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 on Appeal With Application for Extension of Time and Constitutional Writs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant breached contractual, fiduciary, and statutory director's duties owed to the respondent" 'Whether procedural fairness was afforded in the proceedings below' 'Whether there was apprehended or actual bias by the trial judge' 'Whether the applicant had standing to bring the appeal and the application for Constitutional writs' 'Whether the orders relating to the assignment of IP and patent applications were correct' 'Whether the cross-claim alleging oppression by the respondent was properly dismissed' 'Whether damages awarded against the applicant were correctly assessed']

Ratio Decidendi

None of the grounds of appeal in relation to apprehended bias, procedural unfairness, assignment of patent applications, finding of oppressiveness, exclusion of evidence, amendments to pleadings, or quantification of damages were made out; the findings of the trial judge as to breaches of contractual, fiduciary, and statutory duties, dismissal of the cross-claim, and the relief awarded were upheld. The applicant was granted an extension of time, but the appeal and the application for Constitutional writs were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal and application for constitutional writs dismissed. Extension of time to appeal granted.

Orders

  • ['The applicant be granted an extension of time within which to appeal and that his appeal be heard and determined instanter.' 'The appeal be dismissed.' 'The application for an order seeking that a writ of certiorari be issued be dismissed.' "The appellant pay the respondent's costs of and incidental to the...