Westham Dredging Company Pty Ltd v Woodside Petroleum Development Pty Ltd & Anor [1983] FCA 26

CATCHWORODS

Trade Practices Act - action pursuant to Section 82 based on breach of Section 52 - allegedly inaccurate report of consulting engineers supplied to prospective tenderers for harbour dredging contract ~- scope of application of Section 52 - privately negotiated contract - relevance of headings "Consumer Protection" and "Unfair Practices" in Part V - Division 1 - interpretation of Section 52 ~ conduct not alleged to

be unfair ~- whether statement of claim discloses cause

of action.

TRADE PRACTICES ACT 1974 ss. 52 and 82

G. 172 of 1982

WESTHAM DREDGING COMPANY PTY. LIMITED v. WOODSIDE PETROLEUM DEVELOPMENT PTY. LIMITED and MAUNSELL & PARTNERS PTY. LIMITED and STICHTING NEDERLANDS ADVIESBUREAU VOOR INGENIEURSWERKEN IN HET BUITENLAND

St. John, J. Sydney

3 March 1983

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

GENERAL DIVISION

No. 172 of 1982

BETWEEN :

WESTHAM DREDGING COMPANY PTY. LIMITED

Applicant

AND:

WOODSIDE PETROLEUM DEVELOPMENT PTY.

LIMITED - and -

MAUNSELL & PARTNERS PTY. LIMITED - and -

STICHTING NEDERLANDS ADVIESBUREAU

VOOR INGENIEURSWERKEN IN HET

BULTENLAND Respondents ORDERS JUDGE MAKING ORDERS: ST. JOHN, J.

DATE OF ORDERS: THURSDAY 3 MARCH 1983

WHERE MADE: AT SYDNEY

THE COURT FINDS THAT:

1. IT hold that the defences raised by the first

respondent as set out in the judgment are a

«2/2

2.

valid answer in law to the statement of claim.

I hold also, that the defences raised by the second and third respondents in sub-paragraphs (ii) and (iv) of paragraph 16 of their amended defence are valid answers in law to the statement

of claim.

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

The applicant to pay the respondents' costs of the action to date, including those incurred in the preliminary questions of law and the

motion in relation thereto.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY