Federal Court of Australia
CATCHWORDS
Trade Practices - Circular letter alleged to be contract, arrangement or understanding substantially lessening
competition ~ Conduct alleged to constitute exclusive dealing.
Practice - Application seeking dismissal of proceedings on
the ground that they disclose no cause of action ~ proceedings alleged to be frivolous and vexatious - Jurisdiction to dis- miss or stay proceedings - Consideration of principles applic-
able in exercise of jurisdiction.
Trade Practices Act, 1974 ss. 45 and 47
Federal Court Rules Order 20 Rule 2
PLUTEUS (NO. 8) PTY. LIMITED V. G.J. COLES & COY. LIMITED;
JOSEPH P. MONAHAN JR; DENNIS OWEN; JOHN DAVIDSON No. G 145 of 1983
Beaumont, J. Sydney
26 Sytnmey;, 1983. AUGUST:
wt
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION
BETWEEN:
ee ee ee
No. G145 of 1983
PLUTEUS (NO. 8) PTY. LIMITED
i
ORDER
Judge making order:
Date of order:
Applicant
G.J. COLES & COY. LIMITED
First Respondent
JOSEPH P. MONAHAN JR. Second Respondent
DENNIS OWEN Third Respondent
JOHN DAVIDSON Fourth Respondent
Beaumont, J.
26 August, 1983.
Where made: Sydney.
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. I order that the application be dismissed.
2. I order that the costs of the application be reserved. 3. I fix 2 September, 1983 as the date within twenty one
days after which any notice of appeal shall be filed and
served for the purposes of Order 52 Rule 15(1) (a) (iii).
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
) ) NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) ) )
GENERAL DIVISION No. G145 of 1983
BETWEEN: PLUTEUS (NO. 8) PTY. LIMITED Applicant AND: G.J. COLES & COY. LIMITED
First Respondent
JOSEPH P. MONAHAN JR. Second Respondent
DENNIS OWEN Third Respondent
JOHN DAVIDSON Fourth Respondent
CORAM: Beaumont, J.
DATED: 1G Auge 5 |q33
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Introduction
This is an application by the respondents to these proceedings seeking, in essence, that the proceedings and the application for interlocutory relief be dismissed on the ground that they disclose no cause of action and are there- fore frivolous and vexatious. The inherent jurisdiction and the jurisdiction of the Court under 0.20 r.2 are sought to be
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