On-line Consulting P/L v. Landmark Systems Corporation & Anor [1994] FCA 1005
Federal Court of Australia
Full text
Select any passage to save a personal note with optional tags.
JUDGMENT No. ...22,08, 7k.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )
)
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) NG 857 of 1994
)
GENERAL DIVISION )
ON-LINE CONSULTING PTY
LIMITED
Applicant
LANDMARK SYSTEMS
CORPORATION AND ANOR
Respondent
Coram: Whitlam J
Place: Sydney
Date: 8 December 1994
: * EDERAL COURT OF
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT AUSTRALIA
PRINCIPAL
(EX TEMPORE)
The parties are agreed that the application herem be dismissed. The only
question to be resolved 1s the question of costs of the application.
It is a curious application smasmuch as what it sought was relief restraining the first
and second respondents from representing that the first respondent had validly
termmated an agreement and that the applicant had breached that agreement. Stated
in that way, it shows that the application really begs the question, which is whether there
was an entitlement to terminate the agreement.
2.
One may well envisage circumstances in which the making of such representations
could be misleading or deceptive conduct, which ought to be enjomed under the Trade
Practices Act. Such a circumstance might emst where there had been some adjudication
of entitlement to terminate by a competent tribunal. However, the situation m the
market place when there is a commercial dispute between two organisations, each of
whom asserts its rights - one to have terminated, and the other to resist the purported
termination and to insist upon performance of the contract, is in the normal
circumstances something that can be worked out in the market place.
Here it is common ground between the parties that the question of the
entitlement will be resolved in the courts of Virginia, which jumsdiction the agreement
expressly provides shall furnish not simply the law to be applied, but also the forum to
decide the question. [ am informed by the parties that proceedings are already on foot
in Virginia and that the matter will be shortly resolved.
Mr Moore relies, m support of his request for costs, on the fact (which is accepted
for purposes of the costs application by the respondents) that his client did not know that
the respondents had been making such representations until after this application was
made. He draws attention to a paragraph im the affidavit in support of the application,
which deposes to conversations where the first respondent's officers had said they would
be approaching customers.
None of that strikes me as being very unusual. In all the circumstances it seems
to me that, the application was doomed to failure. Accordingly, I order, by consent, that
iT
3.
the application be dismissed and, over the opposition of the applicant, that the applicant
pay the respondents' costs of the application.
I certify that this and the preceding two pages are a
true copy of the reasons for judgment herein of the
Hon. Justice A.P. Whitlam
Associate: horanela
Date: 8 December 1994
G.A. Moore of counsel instructed by Gibsons appeared for the applicant
Mr PN. Argy of Mallesons Stephen Jaques appeared for the respondents
Date of hearing: 8 December 1994
Related laws
No related documents linked yet.
You've got 21 of 22 free Acts left this visit. Sign up anytime for Facts, Related, and study briefs too.