Fencott, B.E. & Assoc. Pty Ltd v Eretta Pty Ltd & Anor [1986] FCA 370
Federal Court of Australia
Full text
Select any passage to save a personal note with optional tags.
Va
~ S7o
EN Cia! perry
NOT CONSIDERED SUITABLE FOR DISTRIBUTION
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY No. 83 of 1986
GENERAL DIVISION
BETWEEN:
BRYAN E. FENCOTT AND
ASSOCIATES PTY LIMITED
Applicant
AND:
ERETTA PTY LIMITED
REL ve First Respondent
= 2 SEP 19 AND:
FPEDEMAL COURT OF
AUSTRALIA JOHN COOKE
PRINCIPAL
Second Respondent
EX-TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
BURCHETT J.
This application relates to three groups of amendment
sought to be made to the Statement of Claim. The first concerns
the basis of the claim against the first respondent and 1s not
opposed. The second concerns a proposed claim under s.52 of the
Trade Practices Act 1974 against the companies sought to be
joined as third, fourth and fifth respondents by amendment of the
Statement of Claim. It is conceded that that claim is already
barred by the limitation provision in the Trade Practices Act
1974, s.82(2), and the amendment is opposed. After some
argument, counsel for the applicant indicated that he did not any
longer press this amendment.
Ne
The third group of amendments is sought to raise a claim
that the proposed third, fourth and fifth respondents were,
knowingly or with constructive knowledge, parties to breaches of
fiduciary duty which are alleged against the first respondent,
and are themselves liable as fiduciaries. It is not suggested
that I should refuse this group of amendments as clearly outside
the accrued jurisdiction of the Court, nor do I think I should
refuse them on that ground. What was argued was that the
drafting was unnecessarily confusing and the actual claims made
were unclear. After some argument, I stood the matter over to
today to enable a re-draft of the proposed amended Statement of
Claim to be submitted, clarifying the amendments in the last
category and eliminating those in the second.
I have now received a re-draft of pages 8 to 11
inclusive of the previously submitted further amended Statement
of Claim. The further amended Statement of Claim in question has
been marked as Exhibit A in this application, and I will have the
substituted pages 8 to 11 marked as Exhibit B.
I allow the amendments as set forth in Exhibit A
substituting the pages in Exhibit B for the corresponding pages
in Exhibit A.
I certify that this and the
preceding one (1) page area
true copy of the Reasons for
Judgment herein of his Honour
Mr. Justice Burchett. .
CL Ainelour
—_—
Associate
Dated: 20 August, 1986.