Federal Court of Australia
JUDGMENT No. LA LEE 7-26,
NO QUESTION OF PRINCIPLE
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY QG 144 of 1995
BETWEEN: RUSSELL GORDON HAIG MATHEWS
APPLICANT
AND: TELSTRA CORPORATION LIMITED RESPONDENT
JUDGE: DRUMMOND J
DATE OF ORDER: 24/05/96
WHERE MADE: BRISBANE
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. Proceedings. number QG 144 of 1995 be transferred to the District Court of
Queensland at Brisbane.
2. In proceedings number QG 144 of 1995, paragraph 1 of the amended application be
struck out. 3. The costs of today will be costs in the proceedings. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court
Rules.
NO QUESTION OF PRINCIPLE
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY QG 144 of 1995
BETWEEN: RUSSELL GORDON HAIG MATHEWS
APPLICANT AND: TELSTRA CORPORATION LIMITED RESPONDENT JUDGE: DRUMMOND J DATE: 24/05/96 PLACE: BRISBANE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
I have before me an application by Mr Mathews against Telstra seeking injunctive relief and damages under the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) on a number of bases. Directions were given on 9 February to enable Mr Mathews to refine his case and put it in the form in which he wished to run it. He responded to that and it is apparent from the material filed that the conduct alleged against Telstra Corporation Limited in respect of which Mr Mathews sought injunctive relief has ceased, and he himself has confirmed today that he does not seek injunctive relief for that reason. The only other remedy he is seeking is in damages, as I say,
on a number of bases.
One of the bases upon which he seeks damages is in respect of conduct alleged to have been engaged in by Telstra in breach of s 51LAA. Notwithstanding the opportunity that Mr Mathews has had to refine his case and put it in the form in which he was satisfied to run it, he has completely failed to expose any foundation for as 51AA claim. He indicated that he wishes an opportunity to amend, but it does not seem to me to be appropriate to grant that application given the history of the matter and, in particular, the ample opportunity Mr
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate