Muller, Hans Martin & Anor v. Fencott, Bryan Eric & Ors [1981] FCA 147

Lene

AT

CATCHWORDS

Trade Practices - misleading and deceptive statements - action in Federal Court - proceedings already instituted by one respondent in Supreme Court - application for stay of proceedings in Federal Court. Legitimate juridical advantage of applicants balanced against disadvantage to

respondents - relevant considerations.

Judiciary Act 1903 s.78B Trade Practices Act 1974 ss. 52, 75B, 82, 86

HANS MARTIN MULLER First Applicant SCRID NOMINEES PTY. LTD.

Second Applicant BRYAN ERIC FENCOTT and PATRICIA ALMA

FENCOTT First Respondents H. & T. HOLDINGS PTY. LID. trading

as CITY BUSINESS BROKERS Second Respondents JAMES JOHN

HONDROS Third Respondent OAKLAND NOMINEES PTY. LTD. Fourth Respondent VICTOR HARRY JOHNSEN Fifth Respondent

W.A.G. No. 24 of 1981 TOOHEY J.

AT DARWIN

THURSDAY 10 SEPTEMBER 1981

me ee om. ok

NN

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION

W.A.G, No. 24 of 1981

wre

BETWEEN. HANS MARTIN MULLER - First Applicant

AND

SCRID NOMINEES PTY. LTD. ~ Second Applicant

AND BRYAN ERIC FENCOTT and PATRICIA ALMA FENCOTT

- First Respondents AND

H. & T. HOLDINGS PTY. LID. trading as

CITY 'BUSINESS BROKERS - Second Respondents

AND JAMES JOHN HONDROS - Third Respondent

AND OAKLAND NOMINEES PTY. LTD. - Fourth Respondent AND, VICTOR HARRY JOHNSEN - Fifth Respondent

AT DARWIN . CORAM: Toohey J. 10 September 1981

REASONS FOR DECISION

On 10 July 1981 Hans Martin Muller and Scrid Nominees Pty. Ltd., a company of which Mr. Muller is a director, began

proceedings in the Federal Court against Bryan Eric Fencott and

Patricia Alma Fencott, H. & T. Holdings Pty. Ltd., James John

Hondros, Oakland Nominees Pty. Ltd. and Victor Harry Johnsen.

The applicants claimed against each of the respondents damages pursuant to s.82 of the Trade Practices Act 1974, alternatively damages at common law. They sought additional relief against some of the respondents.