Pacific Star Communications Pty Ltd v Telstra Corporation Ltd [1997] FCA 1618

JUDGMENT No. LLB £282

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. NG 498 of 1997 GENERAL DIVISION ) Between: PACIFIC STAR COMMUNICATIONS PTY LIMITED

First Applicant

SunNET PTY LIMITED Second Applicant

/ FEDERAL COURT \ f OF AUSTRALIA

21 SEP 2001 LIBRARY

ComsWEST PTY LIMITED Third Applicant

And: TELSTRA CORPORATION LIMITED Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT EINFELD J SYDNEY 26 NOVEMBER 1997

As at 30 June 1997, the Court was being asked to make interlocutory orders to maintain in position the relationship between the parties to this application and the services being provided by the respondent to the applicant companies. At that time, the respondent applied to transfer that interlocutory proceeding to Queensland, either the Supreme Court or the Queensland registry of the Federal Court. That application failed for reasons set out in the judgment given on 30 June which can be summarised, in respect of the proposed cross vesting to the Supreme Court, as being that it seemed likely

that the Queensland Supreme Court proceedings brought by Telstra

to recover a debt from these applicants would have to be cross- vested to this Court because a cross-claim was to be filed raising a claim under section 46 of the Trade Practices Act over which the Queensland Supreme Court does not have primary jurisdiction. As to a change of venue, I found that it was not convenient to have two registries of the Court hearing similar

litigation when there was no true prejudice or inconvenience

suggested.

Although no such cross-claim had been filed, cross~-claims in similar proceedings before this Court had raised such matters, and the Court was informed then, as it has been informed today, that similar claims are to be made in this litigation. The applicants here explain that the reason why the cross claim has not been filed in the Queensland Supreme Court proceedings is because the respondent has been tardy in providing particulars and an amended statement of claim in those proceedings. It