Turner, W.R. & Ors v. Acfold Investments Pty Ltd [1985] FCA 30

> } > No. G288 of 1984. } )

BENERAL DIVISTON

a THE MOETER QF: THE TRADE PRACTICES ACT 1974

BETWEEN: WARREN ROBERT TURNER First applicant

LIMITED

cant

LAUREN MAVIS TURNER Third applicant

ANTS

2 hiN ITED

Second respondent

HORRY LONDY Third respondent

ORDER Judge making order: Beaumont, J. Tate order made: 15 February 1985.

Where made: Sydney.

1. The second applicant provide security in the amount

of $2.,00¢G.00 for the costs of the respondents of these

proceedings am the form of cash, such security to be Provided within 14 days of the date hereof to the satisfaction of the Registrar.

2. Further proceedings on the second applicant's claim aaginst the respondents be stayed until such security is

provided.

3. Reserve special liberty to the respondents to apply for further security for costs om such notice as a judge of

the Court may direct.

4, ° Liberty be reserved to any party to apply

generally, on three days' notice.-

Se This application stand over tol April 1985 st

10.15 a...

6. No order as to costs of the application.

No. G28e af 1964,

we

RETWEEN: WARREN ROBERT TURNER

First applicant

CULLANDS PT Second appl

LAUREN MAVIS TURNER Third spplicant

ANE SEROhD ANVESTMENTS PTY. LIMITED First respondent

RB. FOSTER PTY. LIMITED Second respondent

HARRY LONDY

Third respondent

CORAM: Beaumont, J.

DATED. 15 February 1985.

By their application and statement of claim filed on 14 August 1984, the applicants seek declarations that the

Tespondents have engaged in conduct in contravention of

58.52, 93, S3A, SSA and S93 of tne Trade Practices Act, 1974 C*the Act"). Uaneges under s.82 and further orders pursuant to 5.87 are sought together with a declaration that the first applicant is antitled to rescind an agreement for sale dated 31 August 1982 made between the first respondent as vendor and the first applicant as purchaser for the sale of Lat 21 in a multi-storey building known as "Langley Fark*, ll Aerodrome Road, Maroochydore, Qld. at 2 price of $130,000.00. The accrued or associated jurisdiction of the Court is sought to be invoked in respect of 3 number of Claims made under the general law. These claims are said to arise out of the same sale transaction. The statement of clsim indicates that the disputes between the parties have had along and complicated history, including litigation between the parties in respect of the same transaction in the Supreme Court of Queensland. In August 1984, the applicants applied to the Court for an order restraining tie first respondent from praceeding with the action in the