Skip to main content
body for professional bookkeepers
Board of Directors
Constitution, ByLaws & Code of Ethics
Member Complaints and Discipline
What is a Bookkeeper?
What is a BAS Agent?
What is an Accounting Technician?
Find a Bookkeeper
Online Membership Application
Membership Application Price
Discussion Group Meetings
How To Advance
AAT New Sign In
CPD - Other
Diploma of Payroll Services
BAS and Payroll Course
Cert IV Accounting & Bookkeeping
Cert IV New Small Business
Non Accredited Courses
Certified Business Advisor
Grow to the Cloud
Templates and Checklists
Tech Talk Webinars
Industry / Association Contacts
e-News & Views
AAT HR Advice powered by AB Phillips
NSW Supreme Court has ruled an Employsure contract is not enforceable
If you have clients who are unhappily locked into an Employsure contract, you may want to share this news article with them.
Employsure sued their client, Zintix, after they attempted to quit their contract with Employsure ceasing to pay their instalments required against the contract 8 months after signing. Employsure pursued legal action, demanding payment of $18,463, stating that the contract clause (c) required that non-payment would “result in the total balance outstanding becoming payable immediately in full”. Whilst initially being successful with their claim in the NSW Local Court, however, when Zintix appealed this decision to the NSW Supreme Court, the result was quite different.
Under contract law, a key principle is that a penalty clause is “void” and therefore not enforceable. The NSW Supreme Court ruled that the clause (c) in question was indeed a penalty clause and was therefore unenforceable. The Court further ruled that Zintix would not have to pay the claimed money and Employsure would have to pay their customers legal expenses.