Federal Court of Australia
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) ) NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) NG 433 of 1993 ) GENERAL DIVISION )
BETWEEN: ROBERT GEORGE MEAGER
First Applicant
GEOFFREY RONALD GOULD
Second Applicant
ALAN EDWARD LEWIS
Third Applicant
AND: JOHN THOMAS CHAMPION
First Respondent
INTERCONTINENTAL
INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT LIMITED
Second Respondent
JUDGE: BURCHETT J PLACE: SYDNEY DATED: 21 JULY 1997
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
BURCHETT J In this matter I am satisfied that the respondent, John Thomas Charles Champion, who has not appeared, was served in accordance with the orders previously made by me. That is to say he was served with the orders requiring him to put in an appearance and take other steps if he desired to defend the proceeding, and he was served with the motion for judgment with which I am presently dealing and with the appropriate documents in support of that motion.
I am also satisfied that a case has been established, which I accept in the absence of any contradiction from Mr Champion, that breaches of s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 occurred, in which he was involved in the relevant sense as indicated by the provisions of that statute, and that as a result of those misrepresentations the sums of money shown in the various affidavits of group members were paid out and have been lost. I am satisfied that it is appropriate to enter a verdict in favour of the first applicant, as representative for the group members named in the application, in the sum of $834,206.15. In fact, somewhat more than that amount has been proved, but the group members are content to seek a verdict only for the amount that I have mentioned. In those circumstances, I make the orders contained in the short minutes of order which have been submitted, subject to the alterations that I have made in ink. I certify that this and the preceding one (1) page are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of his Honour Justice Burchett. Associate: Date: 4 August 1997 Solicitor for the Applicants: Brian Wingett Date of hearing: 21 July 1997
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