Rasomen Pty Limited (t/as Shell Fairview Park) v The Shell Company of Australia Ltd [1995] FCA 1015

CATCHWORDS INJUNCTIONS - interim injunction under s 21(3) of the Petroleum Retail Marketing Franchise Act 1980 (Cth) - whether serious issue to be tried between the parties - failure of evidence to raise serious question as to whether the applicant is a party to a franchise agreement - comments, in the statutory context, on the position of innocent third parties. Petroleum Retail Marketing Franchise Act 1980 (Cth) ss 3, 6, 20A, 21 and 26 Chronopolous v Caltex Oil (Australia) Pty Ltd (1982) 45 ALR 481 Mobil Oil Australia Ltd v Brindle (1985) 9 FCR 17 Best v Caltex Oil (Australia) Pty Ltd (1989) 87 ALR 1 Castlemaine Tooheys Ltd and Others v The State of South Australia (1986) 161 CLR 148 Codelfa Construction Proprietary Limited v State Rail Authority of New South Wales (1982) 149 CLR 337 Walton Stores (Interstate) Limited v Maher and Another (1988) 164 CLR 387 Austotel Pty Ltd and Another v Franklin's Selfserve Pty Ltd (1989) 16 NSWLR 582 Silktone Pty Ltd v Devreal Capital Pty Ltd and Others (1990) 21 NSWLR 317 No SG 88 of 1995 RASOMEN PTY LIMITED (trading as Shell Fairview Park) v THE SHELL COMPANY OF AUSTRALIA LIMITED Branson J Adelaide 8 December 1995

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA) ) SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY) No SG 88 of 1995 ) GENERAL DIVISION ) BETWEEN: RASOMEN PTY LIMITED (trading as Shell Fairview Park) Applicant - and - THE SHELL COMPANY OF AUSTRALIA LIMITED Respondent MINUTES OF ORDER CORAM: Branson J PLACE: Adelaide DATE: 8 December 1995 THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application pursuant to s21(3) of the Petroleum Retail Marketing Franchise Act 1980 (Cth) for an interim injunction is dismissed. 2. The applicant is to pay the costs of the respondent of such application. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules