Paul Mitchell Systems (Australia) Pty Ltd v Paul Mitchell Systems PTE Ltd & Ors [1995] FCA 573

C A T C H W O R D S C O N T R A C T - trade practices - appeal against judgment - assessment of credibility of witnesses - demeanour evidence - power of appellate court to review first instance decision on conflicting testimony - hearsay - construction of contracts - whether implied terms - general contractual duty of co-operation - conduct of parties in determining costs - appeal allowed in part and otherwise dismissed. Cheshire & Fifoot Law of Contract 6th Australian Edition Trade Practices Act 1974 s.52 B.P. Refinery Westernport Pty Ltd v. Shire of Hastings (1977) 52 ALJR 20 Codelfa Construction Pty Ltd v. State Rail Authority of New South Wales (1982) 149 CLR 337 Poseidon Ltd v. Adelaide Petroleum N.L. (1991) 105 ALR 25 Devries v. Australian National Railways Commission (1992) 177 CLR 472 R. v. Earl of Banbury (1695) 90 ER 231 S.S. Hontestroom v. S.S. Sagaporack [1927] AC 37 Cummings v. Lewis (1993) 41 FCR 559 PAUL MITCHELL SYSTEMS (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD v. PAUL MITCHELL SYSTEMS PTE. LTD and WALTER LAU LOKE LIM also known as LAU LOKE LIM and LOW LOKE LIM WAG 158 of 1993 FRENCH, LEE and COOPER JJ. PERTH 21 JULY 1995

IN THE FEDERAL COURT ) OF AUSTRALIA ) WESTERN AUSTRALIA ) DISTRICT REGISTRY ) GENERAL DIVISION ) No. WAG 158 of 1993 ON APPEAL from a decision of the Federal Court of Australia B E T W E E N: PAUL MITCHELL SYSTEMS (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD Appellant and PAUL MITCHELL SYSTEMS PTE LTD First Respondent and WALTER LAU LOKE LIM also known as LAU LOKE LIM and LOW LOKE LIM Second Respondent MINUTE OF ORDER JUDGES MAKING ORDER:FRENCH, LEE AND COOPER JJ. DATE OF ORDER: 21 JULY 1995 WHERE MADE: PERTH THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The appeal is allowed by substituting for the learned trial judge's answers to questions 3 and 4 the following: (i) Answer to Question 3 - No. (ii) Answer to Question 4 - No, but the agreement was varied by the letter dated 21 June 1990 in the terms set out in