Sun Wah Marine Products (China) Trading Company Ltd v. Wistane P/L t/as Golden Bay Seafoods & Anor [1994] FCA 769

JUDGMENT No. sacl! 2... NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY) No. NG 643 of 1994 GENERAL DIVISION

BETWEEN:

SUN WAH MARINE PRODUCTS (CHINA) TRADING COMPANY LIMITED

Applicant AND:

WISTANE PTY LIMITED T/AS GOLDEN BAY SEAFOODS and ANOTHER

Respondent

CORAM: SACKVILLE J.

PLACE: SYDNEY

DATE: 14 OCTOBER 1994 25 OCT 1994

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA PRINCIPAL INS FOR NT HIS HONOUR: This is the first return date of proceedings

brought by Sun Wah Marine Products (China) Trading Company Limited against Wistane Pty Limited and Kenton Binfield Teede, the first and second respondents respectively. Mr Rigby, who appears on behalf of the respondents, has sought orders that the proceedings be in effect transferred to the Western Australian Registry of the Court pursuant to the provisions of s.48 of the Federal Court Act, 1976 and Order 10 rule 1(2)(f) Federal Court Rules.

No notice of motion has been filed, but I am told that Mr Rigby

or his firm provided a copy of an affidavit of Mr Teede in support of a foreshadowed application for orders of the kind to which I have referred. In any event, Mr Argyropoulos, who appears for the applicant indicated that he had no objection to

the application being dealt with today.

The application seeks relief under the Trade Practices Act 1974. The allegations made in the statement of claim are that the applicant is a company incorporated in Hong Kong and is an importer/exporter and distributor of seafood. It is alleged that the first respondent is a company with a registered office in Western Australia conducting business as the supplier of seafood products. The second respondent is alleged to be a director and

employee of the first respondent.

The statement of claim alleges that, on a number of separate occasions, the first and second respondents represented to the applicant that the first respondent would supply to the applicant by sea certain quantities of Western Australian origin block frozen scallops, at a certain price. The representations are said in each case to have been made by letters faxed to the applicant in Hong Kong. The statement of claim goes on to allege that in reliance upon the representations, the applicant entered into certain agreements to on-sell the scallops to purchasers within Hong Kong, at prices higher than those that had been