Soden v Soden

[2024] FCA 1085

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Soden v Soden [2024] FCA 1085

File number:

QUD 29 of 2023

Judgment of:

DERRINGTON J

Date of judgment:

12 September 2024

Date of publication of reasons:

18 September 2024

Catchwords:

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application by plaintiff to enforce settlement agreement entered into with defendants in relation to the proceedings – where no dispute that settlement was reached – where breaches of settlement agreement alleged – where defendants otherwise appear to be avoiding their obligations under the agreement – declarations made

Legislation:

Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth)

Cases cited:

AG Cowley Holdings Pty Ltd v Central City Pty Ltd (2010) 183 FCR 102

Macteldir Pty Ltd v Dimovski (2005) 226 ALR 773

We Two Pty Ltd v Shorrock (No 2) (2005) 220 ALR 749

Division:

General Division

Registry:

Queensland

National Practice Area:

Commercial and Corporations

Sub-area:

Corporations and Corporate Insolvency

Number of paragraphs:

17

Date of hearing:

2 July and 12 September 2024

Counsel for the Plaintiff:

Mr S Hogg

Solicitor for the Plaintiff:

Pennisi Zia Lawyers

Solicitor for the Defendants:

Mr P Sayer of QLD Law Group

ORDERS

QUD 29 of 2023

BETWEEN:

XENON SODEN

Plaintiff

AND:

LUKE SODEN

First Defendant

DR PICKLES PTY LTD

Second Defendant

ORDER MADE BY:	DERRINGTON J
DATE OF ORDER:	12 SEPTEMBER 2024

THE COURT DECLARES THAT:

1.The parties have compromised the proceeding by, between 15 and 22 December 2023 entering into a contract whereby it was agreed that:

(a)The second defendant would pay the amount outstanding on the plaintiff’s Optus account.

(b)The defendants were to provide confirmation of payment of the plaintiff’s Optus account by 29 December 2023.

(c)The first defendant would indemnify the plaintiff as regards the amount of $50,000 that the plaintiff caused to be paid to himself from the second defendant’s PayPal account.

(d)By 15 January 2024, the second defendant was to provide the plaintiff with a breakdown of the superannuation payments it has made to the plaintiff’s superannuation account.

(e)In the event the second defendant had not paid the plaintiff’s superannuation it must do so within 14 days of being notified that the plaintiff’s superannuation had not been paid in full.

2.The terms of the settlement agreement between the parties referred to in paragraph 1 were more comprehensively described in the draft deed of settlement which appears at exhibit MR-17 to the affidavit of Matthew Robinson filed in support of the plaintiff’s application.

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

3.The second defendant is to pay any outstanding amount on the Optus account number 6232 9303 044 within 14 days from the date of this Order.

4.The defendants pay 60% of the plaintiff’s costs of this application, to be taxed.

Note:   Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

DERRINGTON J:

Introduction

1. By an interlocutory application filed on 17 May 2024, the plaintiff, Mr Xenon Soden, seeks to enforce an agreement to compromise the proceedings which was reached between himself and the defendants, Mr…