Sea Food International Pty Ltd v Lam, Theng Pew & Anor [1995] FCA 883

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA) QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. QG 193 of 1994 GENERAL DIVISION ) BETWEEN : SEA FOOD INTERNATIONAL PTY LTD Applicant AND : THENG PEW LAM First Respondent AND : HUXHAM PTY LTD Second Respondent CORAM: Spender J PLACE: Brisbane DATE: 25 October 1995 MINUTES OF ORDER THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The notice motion is dismissed. 2. The applicant pay the respondents' costs of the motion, to be taxed if not agreed. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA) QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. QG 193 of 1994 GENERAL DIVISION ) BETWEEN : SEA FOOD INTERNATIONAL PTY LTD Applicant AND : THENG PEW LAM First Respondent AND : HUXHAM PTY LTD Second Respondent CORAM: Spender J PLACE: Brisbane DATE: 25 October 1995 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT This is a notice of motion where the applicant, Sea Food International Pty Ltd, seeks an order that Huxham Pty Ltd, the second respondent, file and serve a supplementary list of documents discovering financial records in its possession or power in relation to the carrying on of a sea food processing business conducted from premises situation at Thurecht Parade, Scarborough in the State of Queensland on and from 11 October 1994 to date. The application for further discovery is opposed. Mr Martin of Counsel for the applicant says that the documents sought are relevant to the issues in the proceedings and the court should order their discovery. The substance in the allegations by the applicant is that there was an agreement by the second respondent to lease premises at Thurecht Parade, Scarborough, to the first applicant and that that agreement was dishonoured. The applicant asserts that as a consequence it suffered loss and damage. According to the particulars of its loss and damage, the applicant says: " The Applicant was forced to leave its Tubb Street premises and move its operations to an unlicensed storage facility at Pine Street, Clontarf from which the Applicant's seafood processing business could not be conducted. The Applicant could have conducted its business from Thurecht Parade. As a result of not being able to conduct its seafood processing business, the Applicant has lost the profit it would otherwise have earned particulars of which are set out in the following table:- TURNOVER COST GROSS MARGIN Mullet Roe 1,800,000 1,052,000 748,000 Other exports 250,000 218,000 32,000 Spanner Crabs 2,400,000 1,992,000 408,000 Scallops 2,220,000 1,980,000 220,000 Institutional Distribution 1,000,000 700,000 300,000 Wholesale 1,090,000 872,000 218,000 Retail 2,500,000 1,750,000 750,000 Total 2,676,000 Expenses just less than 1,500,000 Annualised net profit 1,176,000 Present value of loss of profit over 5 year lease period term 4,401,601.27