Login
Former Dentons partner demands salary records
A former Dentons partner said the firm’s salary records for equity partners would support his claim for loss and damages arising out of alleged breaches of the Fair Work Act.
Naomi Neilson
Ahead of a mediation between the parties in mid-December, former Dentons real estate partner Guy Albeck told the al Court’s Justice Michael Wheelahan on Tuesday (3 December) that the firm failed to turn over salary records for its equity partners.
“By reason of the misconduct, [Albeck] lost the opportunity to become an equity partner in his former firm, and we simply wish to know … what the partners presently earn so that we can make a claim to say he would have at least earned as much as the average partner.
“At the very least, we say that [Dentons] can and should do what all parties subject of an order for discovery must do, which is turn their minds to the issue and make a reasonable search,” Fetter said.
At the centre of the dispute is an allegation that Dentons and former Australia chair Doug Stipanicev breached the Fair Work Act by taking adverse action against Albeck after he complained of bullying.
At the interlocutory hearing on Tuesday, Justice Wheelahan said that while he understood the forensic purposes of the salary information, he questioned whether Albeck had been “living under a rock” because he would likely have “some appreciation of the range of salaries”.
Fetter countered this, telling Justice Wheelahan that the remunerations of equity partners were not shared with salaried partners.
Counsel for Dentons said the firm was unsure which documents Albeck would need to run his case and proposed continuing conversations outside of court to narrow the scope of discovery.
“We’re happy to give him as much help as he needs … without snowing him with thousands of pages of documents, most of which is not going to be relevant,” Dentons’ counsel said.
Leaving to one side the sensitivities of disclosing certain information, counsel added the current application for discovery is an “enormous waterfall of documents which we would resist”.
“One of the things I wish to advance with my learned friend is mechanisms to work out what he really needs and how most efficiently we can give that to him,” counsel said.
In reply, Fetter said Albeck would need the documents before he “can nail his colours to the mast” and put forward his case.
“We want to see, because we don’t know, what the drivers of remuneration are with a view of at least having the choice of running a more tailored case,” Fetter said.
Responding to the proposal that Dentons would aim to have any relevant documents sent over by the end of January, Fetter said it would be “dangerous to kick the can down the road”.
“There may well be disputes at that time about whether or not the material produced is sufficient. My client is keen to keep the trial date, and the concern is we are going to run out of time,” Fetter said.
During the same interlocutory hearing, Justice Wheelahan criticised Dentons’ instructing solicitor for making a claim that the question of misconduct would not be an issue in dispute.
While Dentons’ counsel said that was no longer their position, Justice Wheelahan said it still “delayed progress of the proceedings because of what I consider to be a misconception”.
Editor's note: A previous version of this article incorrectly named the counsel for Guy Albeck.
Naomi Neilson
Naomi Neilson is a senior journalist with a focus on court reporting for Lawyers Weekly.
You can email Naomi at:
