Dye v Commonwealth Securities Limited (No 3)

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Dye v Commonwealth Securities Limited (No 3) [2010] FCA 903

Citation:		Dye v Commonwealth Securities Limited (No 3) [2010] FCA 903
Parties:		VIVIENNE LOUISE DYE v COMMONWEALTH SECURITIES LIMITED
File number:		NSD1165 of 2008
Judge:		KATZMANN J
Supplementary reasons for judgment:		23 August 2010
Date of hearing:	11 March and 30 April 2010
Date of last submissions:	17 May 2010
Place:	Sydney
Division:	GENERAL DIVISION
Category:	No catchwords
Number of paragraphs:	19
Counsel for the Applicant:	Mr P E King
Solicitor for the Applicant:	Turner Freeman
Counsel for the Respondent:	Ms K Eastman
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Freehills

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION	NSD 1165 of 2008

BETWEEN:	VIVIENNE LOUISE DYE Applicant
AND:	COMMONWEALTH SECURITIES LIMITED Respondent

JUDGE:	KATZMANN J
DATE OF ORDER:	23 AUGUST 2010
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The orders of 21 July 2010 are revoked.

2.The respondent file and serve an amended defence by 4pm on Monday 30 August 2010.

3.The applicant pay the respondent’s costs of the motion for leave to amend the statement of claim.

4.The applicant file and serve an amended statement of claim by 4pm on Friday 27 August 2010 reflecting the effect of these and the earlier reasons.

Note:Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
The text of entered orders can be located using Federal Law Search on the Court’s website.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION	NSD 1165 of 2008

BETWEEN:	VIVIENNE LOUISE DYE Applicant
AND:	COMMONWEALTH SECURITIES LIMITED Respondent

JUDGE:	KATZMANN J
DATE:	23 AUGUST 2010
PLACE:	SYDNEY

SUPPLEMENTARY REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. On 9 July 2010 I published reasons for judgment in the above proceeding:  see Dye v Commonwealth Securities Limited [2010] FCA 720 (earlier reasons).

2. The earlier reasons dealt with the applicant’s motion for leave to amend her statement of claim.  The amendments she sought to make were vast.  Unfortunately, I overlooked a small number of the proposed amendments.

3. On 6 August 2010 the respondent’s solicitor wrote to my associate identifying these omissions.  As the orders I made on 21 July 2010 to give effect to my earlier reasons have not been entered I now revoke them to enable me to provide these supplementary reasons.

4. The earlier reasons remain unaffected and these supplementary reasons are to be read with them.

   Proposed amendments 18(p), 18(t) and 18(u)

5. At paragraph 91 and following of the earlier reasons I dealt with proposed amendments to paragraph 18 of the statement of claim, consisting of a series of allegations of behaviour by [X] said to constitute a breach of an implied term of trust and confidence in the applicant’s contract of employment. 

6. I did not, however, deal with the allegation in sub-paragraph (p), which was that he made “threats to the Applicant in the event that she reported his conduct”.

7. In supplementary submissions filed on 26 March 2010 the applicant claimed…