Tasman Capital Pty Ltd v Sinclair

Tasman Capital Pty Ltd appealed to the New South Wales Court of Appeal against a decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales concerning a dispute over a contract and wrongful dismissal. The primary dispute involved whether a binding agreement had been concluded between the parties, despite the intention for certain matters to be later supplemented or refined.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine two principal legal issues. Firstly, whether the parties had reached a concluded agreement, notwithstanding that further details were to be agreed upon or refined at a later stage. Secondly, in the context of a claim for damages for wrongful dismissal, the court had to determine which party bore the onus of proof regarding income earned by the dismissed employee during the period for which they were entitled to notice.

On the issue of contract formation, the Court of Appeal affirmed the principles that an agreement can be binding even if it is to be supplemented by further agreement on other matters, provided the essential terms have been agreed. The court found, on the facts before it, that a concluded agreement had indeed been reached. Regarding the damages for wrongful dismissal, the court held that the onus rested on the employer to prove any income earned by the employee during the notice period, rather than on the employee to prove their loss.

The appeal was dismissed, and Tasman Capital Pty Ltd was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal.