Federal Court of Australia
JUDGMENT No. M157 BT.
>a CATCHWORDS Practice and procedure - action for breaches of provisions
contained in Part V of the Trade Practices Act 1974 against personal respondents - failure to plead that such respondents were "involved in a contravention" of the Part - whether leave to amend application and statement of claim should be granted in the
light of the fact that the causes of action were statute-barred.
Trade Practices Act 1974, ss. 52, 53, 75B and 82
AKMOLINE PTY LI v. H.R.C. SERVIT PTY LIMITED and ORS.
No. G81 of 1987
Coram: Sheppard J. Place: Sydney Date : 27 November 1987
IN THE FRDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY No. G66 of 1987
— ewe we
GENERAL DIVISION
BETWEEN: AKMOLINE PTY LIMITED Applicant AND:
H.R.C. SERVIT PTY LIMITED and ORS,
Respondents
CORAM: SHEPPARD J. DATE : 27 NOVEMBER 1987
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
HIS HONOUR: This is a notice of motion seeking an order that the whole of the amended statement of claim as against the fourth respondent, Mr. Kenny, be struck out. The principal application is one in which the applicant sues three companies and four natural persons, including Mr. Kenny. The amended application filed on 13 August 1985 claims the following, amongst other
velief:-
"L. A declaration that the respondents and each of them have contravened Sections 52, 53(a), (aa), (c) and (f) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 as amended.
2. Damages for breach or breaches of the aforesaid provisions of the Trade Practices Act 1974 as amended and/or damages for breach of contract and/or damages for
misrepresentation".
The causes of action with which I am concerned in this motion are
those arising under the Trade Practices Act 1974.
The amended statement of claim is somewhat lengthy, and toa degree complex, but for present purposes it is enough to refer to paragraphs 5, 7, 7A and 8. Paragraph 5 alleges that by contract made on or about 8 June 1983 between the applicant on the one part and the first and/or second and/or sixth and/or seventh respondents on the other part, the said respondents agreed, inter alia, to sell and/or supply to the applicant a computer accounting and management system described as the "H.R.C. Hospitality Management Package" comprising computer software and hardware management and accounting expertise and point of sale terminals for the highly efficient operation and management of the restaurants known as the Argyle Tavern, Lowenbrau Keller, The Garrison Restaurant and Bunratty Castle situated at 18 Argyle Street, the Rocks, Sydney and known as the Argyle Tavern complex.
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