Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Lopez v Gold Titan Pty Ltd [2022] FCAFC 117 Appeal from: Gold Titan Pty Ltd v Lopez [2021] FCA 918 Gold Titan Pty Ltd v Lopez (No 2) [2021] FCA 1523
File number: NSD 34 of 2022
Judgment of: RARES, STEWART AND GOODMAN JJ
Date of judgment: 12 July 2022
Catchwords: HIGH COURT AND FEDERAL COURT – adequacy of reasons for decision – where primary judge criticised much of the evidence and submissions on loss of profit – where limited findings on or reasoning to briefly stated conclusion on quantum of loss – whether reasons adequate
Legislation: Australian Consumer Law ss 18 and 236 Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) Sch 2
Cases cited: AK v Western Australia [2008] HCA 8; 232 CLR 438 Berry v CTL Secure Pty Ltd [2020] HCA 27; 381 ALR 427 Commonwealth v Amann Aviation Pty Ltd [1991] HCA 54; 174 CLR 64 DL v The Queen [2018] HCA 26; 266 CLR 1 Fightvision Pty Ltd v Onisorou (1999) 47 NSWLR 473 Fink v Fink (1946) 74 CLR 127 Flogas Britain Ltd v Calor Gas Ltd [2013] EWHC 3060 (Ch) General Tire and Rubber Company v Firestone Tyre and Rubber Company Ltd (1976) 93 RPC 197 Generic Health Pty Ltd v Bayer Pharma Aktiengessellschaft (2018) 267 FCR 428 Gold Titan Pty Ltd v Lopez (No 2) [2021] FCA 1523 Gold Titan Pty Ltd v Lopez [2021] FCA 918 Jones v Schiffmann [1971] HCA 52; 124 CLR 303 Lamb v Evans [1893] 1 Ch 218 McRae v Commonwealth Disposals Commission (1951) 84 CLR 377 North East Equity Pty Ltd v Proud Nominees Pty Ltd [2010] FCAFC 60; 269 ALR 60 One Step (Support) Ltd v Morris-Garner [2018] UKSC 20; [2019] AC 649 PKT Technologies (formerly known as Fairlight.AU Pty Ltd) v Peter Vogel Instruments Pty Ltd (2020) 376 ALR 55 Placer (Granny Smith) Pty Ltd v Thiess Contractors Pty Ltd (2003) 196 ALR 257 Ratcliffe v Evans [1892] 2 QB 524 Robb v Green [1895] 2 QB 1 Robb v Green [1895] 2 QB 315 Searle v Commonwealth of Australia (2019) 100 NSWLR 55 Sellars v Adelaide Petroleum NL [1994] HCA 4; 179 CLR 332 Selvanayagam v University of the West Indies [1983] 1 WLR 585; [1983] 1 All ER 824 Wainohu v New South Wales [2011] HCA 24; 243 CLR 181 Wessex Dairies Ltd v Smith [1935] 2 KB 80
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate