Quinn v Descon Group Australia Pty Ltd

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Quinn v Descon Group Australia Pty Ltd & Anor [2023] QDC 88

PARTIES:

ANTHONY QUINN

(applicant)
v

DESCON GROUP AUSTRALIA PTY LTD ACN 625 771 075

(first respondent)
and

DANNY ISAAC

(second respondent)

FILENO:

76/23

DIVISION:

Civil

PROCEEDING:

Application for summary judgment

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court, Brisbane

DELIVEREDON:

30 May 2023

DELIVEREDAT:

Brisbane

HEARINGDATE:

20 April 2023

JUDGE:

Farr SC, DCJ

ORDER:

1.   Application allowed;

2.   Judgment is entered for the plaintiff on the claim;

3.   The defendants’ counterclaim is dismissed; and

4.   I will hear the parties as to any further orders and costs.

CATCHWORDS:

DEEDS – OTHER MATTERS – where the applicant applies for summary judgment - where the parties reached a compromise to proceedings initiated by the applicant in the Federal Circuit and Family Court and executed a deed of settlement – where those proceedings were then dismissed by consent – where the applicant alleges the respondents breached a term of that deed – where the respondents denied the alleged breach and pleaded the applicant failed to comply with his obligations under the deed and counterclaimed – where the deed required the respondents to pay the applicant a total settlement sum of $745,000, that the first instalment of

$150,000 be payable by bank cheque in a meeting on or before 22 December 2022 at which time a photoshoot of the parties

shaking hands and depicting their reconciliation would take place and the respondents would be entitled to publish media

or press releases stating words to the effect that the parties have reconciled – where the deed did not state the photoshoot location – where the respondents insisted on the photoshoot being taken at their offices where the applicant had previously undertaken work – where the applicant made numerous attempts to arrange an alternative location for the photoshoot including to allow the first respondent to have its mobile signage in the background at those venues – where each party contends that the other breached their duty to cooperate – whether the applicant can establish the respondents have no real prospect of defending the applicant’s claim and there is no need for a trial – whether the respondents’ material shows prospects of success by sworn evidence, as distinct from allegations in pleadings.

LEGISLATION:

Civil Proceedings Act 2011 (Qld) s. 58

Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth)
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) r. 292

CASES:

Adaz Nominees Pty Ltd v Castleway Pty Ltd [2020] VSCA 201

Beerens v Blue Scope Distribution Pty Ltd (2012) 39 VR 1 Bernstrom v National Australia Bank Ltd [2003] 1 Qd R 469 Bolton Properties Pty Ltd v JK Investments (Australia) Pty Ltd [2009] 2 Qd R 202

Butt v M’Donald (1896) QLJ 68

Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Salcedo [2005] 2 Qd R 232
Dubois v Ong & Anor [2004] QCA 185
Electricity Generation Corporation v Woodside Energy Ltd
(2014) 251 CLR 640
Gullco International Pty Ltd v Brisbane Parcel Deliveries Pty Ltd [2003] QDC 341
H Lundbeck a/s…