Federal Court of Australia
CATCHWORDS EVIDENCE - estoppel - Anshun estoppel - covenants in lease - Supreme Court action by lessee for permanent injunction based on covenants - Federal Court action by third party seeking declaration covenants invalid due to special federal matter - judgment entered in Supreme Court action without special federal matter being raised - whether successful plaintiff in Supreme Court action entitled to estoppel in Federal Court action - whether evidence to support Federal Court action Commonwealth Cross‑Vesting Act, s3(1), s6(4) Contracts Review Act 1980 (NSW) Federal Court Rules, O20 r2(1) Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross‑Vesting) Act (1987) (Cth), s6, Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross‑Vesting) Act (1987) (WA), s6 Law and Justice Legislation Amendment Act (No3) 1992 Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), PtIV, s45B Boles v Esanda Finance Corporation Ltd (1989) 18 NSWLR 666 Bryant v Commonwealth Bank of Australia (1995) 57 FCR 287 Chamberlain v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation (1988) 164 CLR 502 Henderson v Henderson (1843) 3 Hare 100; 67 ER 313 Higgins Holdings Pty Ltd v The Commonwealth Bank of Australia (1995) ATPR 41-302 Jackson v Goldsmith (1950) 81 CLR 446 Ling v Commonwealth of Australia (Wilcox, Whitlam and Sundberg JJ, 25 July 1996, unreported) Murphy v Abi-Saab (1995) 37 NSWLR 280 NEC Information Systems Australia Pty Ltd v Iveson (1992) 36 FCR 258. Port of Melbourne Authority v Anshun Pty Ltd (1981) 147 CLR 589 Rahme v Commonwealth Bank of Australia (Court of Appeal (NSW), 20 December 1991, unreported) Tanning Research Laboratories Inc v O'Brien (1990) 169 CLR 332 Yat Tung Investment Co Ltd v Dao Heng Bank Ltd [1975] AC 581 WESTPOINT CORPORATION PTY LTD v COLES SUPERMARKETS AUSTRALIA PTY LTD NO WAG 83 OF 1996 R D NICHOLSON J PERTH 18 DECEMBER 1996
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY ) GENERAL DIVISION ) NO WAG 83 OF 1996 B E T W E E N: WESTPOINT CORPORATION PTY LTD Applicant and COLES SUPERMARKETS AUSTRALIA PTY LTD Respondent MINUTE OF ORDER JUDGE MAKING ORDER: R D NICHOLSON J DATE OF ORDER: 18 DECEMBER 1996 WHERE MADE: PERTH THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The proceeding be dismissed. 2. The applicant pay the respondent's costs to be taxed. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
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