ABLE TOURS PTY LTD -v- MANN [No 3] [2013] WASC 196
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2013] WASC 196 | |
| 22/05/2013 | |||
| Case No: | CIV:2198/2007 | 15-17 AUGUST 2012 | |
| Coram: | REGISTRAR C BOYLE | 31/08/12 | |
| 14 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Report made to Court pursuant to orders | ||
| C | |||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | ABLE TOURS PTY LTD (ACN 067 420 080) PHILLIP JOHN MANN AAP SMART COACH PTY LTD (ACN 127 154 965) |
Catchwords: | Order for account Breach of fiduciary obligations Nature of accounts Turns on own facts |
Legislation: | Nil |
Case References: | Able Tours Pty Ltd v Mann [2009] WASC 192 Able Tours Pty Ltd v Mann [No 2] [2013] WASC 96 Barnes v Addy (1874) LR 9 Ch App 244 Gava v Grljusich (Unreported, WASCA, Library No 970492, 18 September 1997) Hospital Products Limited v United States Surgical Corporation [1984] HCA 64; (1984) 156 CLR 41 My Kinda Town Ltd v Soll (1982) FSR 147 Warman International Ltd v Dwyer [1995] HCA 18; (1995) 182 CLR 544 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
- IN CHAMBERS
- Plaintiff
AND
PHILLIP JOHN MANN
First Defendant
AAP SMART COACH PTY LTD (ACN 127 154 965)
Second Defendant
Catchwords:
Order for account - Breach of fiduciary obligations - Nature of accounts - Turns on own facts
Legislation:
Nil
(Page 2)
Result:
Report made to Court pursuant to orders
Category: C
Representation:
Counsel:
Plaintiff : Mr P G McGowan
First Defendant : Mr P R MacMillan
Second Defendant : Mr P R MacMillan
Solicitors:
Plaintiff : Metaxas & Hager
First Defendant : Hewett & Lovitt
Second Defendant : Hewett & Lovitt
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
Able Tours Pty Ltd v Mann [2009] WASC 192
Able Tours Pty Ltd v Mann [No 2] [2013] WASC 96
Barnes v Addy (1874) LR 9 Ch App 244
Gava v Grljusich (Unreported, WASCA, Library No 970492, 18 September 1997)
Hospital Products Limited v United States Surgical Corporation [1984] HCA 64; (1984) 156 CLR 41
My Kinda Town Ltd v Soll (1982) FSR 147
Warman International Ltd v Dwyer [1995] HCA 18; (1995) 182 CLR 544
(Page 3)
- REGISTRAR C BOYLE:
(This Report is published as an annexure to the judgment of the Hon Justice Simmonds, Able Tours Pty Ltd v Mann [No 2] [2013] WASC 96.)
The order to account
1 By a judgment after trial dated 28 July 2009, the Court ordered in part that:
1. The defendants account to the plaintiff for the benefits the defendants received from the contract between the second defendant and TJK Pty Ltd trading as Western Xposure entered into for delivery as described in Able Tours Pty Ltd…
Continue reading Able Tours Pty Ltd v Mann [No 3]
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- ABLE TOURS PTY LTD -v- MANN [No 3] [2013] WASC 196
- Case
- [2013] WASC 196
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the case of Able Tours Pty Ltd v Mann [No 3], the plaintiff sought an account of profits from the defendant, who had breached fiduciary obligations while acting as a director and shareholder of the plaintiff company. The dispute was heard by the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The plaintiff, a company involved in the travel industry, alleged that the defendant misused his position to obtain confidential information and use it for personal gain, contravening his duties as a fiduciary. The court was tasked with determining whether the defendant was liable for the profits he made and, if so, the appropriate quantification of those profits.
The legal issues before the court involved the nature of the accounts to be provided and the extent of the defendant's liability for profits derived from his fiduciary breach. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the defendant's profits were directly attributable to his misuse of the plaintiff's information and whether any profits made were a result of independent and unrelated business activities. The court also needed to address the appropriate methodology for calculating the profits, considering the complex commercial context in which the breaches occurred.
The court found that the defendant had indeed breached his fiduciary duties and that the profits he obtained were directly attributable to his misuse of confidential information. The reasoning hinged on detailed evidence of the defendant's actions and the commercial opportunities he exploited. The court emphasised that the nature of the accounts in such cases turns on the specific facts of each case and that the quantification must be fair and just, reflecting the profits gained at the plaintiff's expense. The court ordered that the defendant provide a detailed account of the profits made from the fiduciary breach, to be quantified according to a methodology agreed upon by the parties or determined by the court.
The final orders of the court required the defendant to provide a report to the court detailing the profits made from the breach of fiduciary duty, along with any other relevant financial information. The report was to be made within a specified timeframe and subject to the court's review to ensure accuracy and fairness. The court retained jurisdiction to make further orders if necessary, reflecting the complex and fact-specific nature of the dispute.
The legal issues before the court involved the nature of the accounts to be provided and the extent of the defendant's liability for profits derived from his fiduciary breach. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the defendant's profits were directly attributable to his misuse of the plaintiff's information and whether any profits made were a result of independent and unrelated business activities. The court also needed to address the appropriate methodology for calculating the profits, considering the complex commercial context in which the breaches occurred.
The court found that the defendant had indeed breached his fiduciary duties and that the profits he obtained were directly attributable to his misuse of confidential information. The reasoning hinged on detailed evidence of the defendant's actions and the commercial opportunities he exploited. The court emphasised that the nature of the accounts in such cases turns on the specific facts of each case and that the quantification must be fair and just, reflecting the profits gained at the plaintiff's expense. The court ordered that the defendant provide a detailed account of the profits made from the fiduciary breach, to be quantified according to a methodology agreed upon by the parties or determined by the court.
The final orders of the court required the defendant to provide a report to the court detailing the profits made from the breach of fiduciary duty, along with any other relevant financial information. The report was to be made within a specified timeframe and subject to the court's review to ensure accuracy and fairness. The court retained jurisdiction to make further orders if necessary, reflecting the complex and fact-specific nature of the dispute.
Orders
Orders of the court
Report made to Court pursuant to orders
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.