Philip Morris (Australia) Ltd v Nixon [2000] FCA 229

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Philip Morris (Australia) Ltd v Nixon [2000] FCA 229

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – REPRESENTATIVE PROCEEDINGS – application for leave to appeal from interlocutory orders – primary judge dismissed application for summary dismissal and granted leave to file amended application and statement of claim – threshold requirements in s 33C(1) in Part IVA Federal Court of Australia Act 1974 (Cth) for representative proceedings that every applicant have a claim against every respondent – level of generality acceptable in pleading claims of group members – whether material facts pleaded established contravention of s 75B Trade Practices Act 1976 (Cth) – whether range of circumstances too broad to satisfy s 33C(1)(b) – whether any common questions of fact and law (s 33C(1)(C)) – pleading requirements for representative proceedings in s 33H(1)– whether pleadings afforded respondents a fair opportunity to meet the case and define the issues for litigation

Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), Part IVA Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), s 52, s 75B, s 82 Federal Court of Australia Amendment Act 1991 (Cth) Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-Vesting) Act 1987 (Cth) Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth), s 23(b)

Nixon v Philip Morris (Australia) Ltd (1999) 165 ALR 515 disapproved Wong v Silkfield Pty Ltd (1999) 165 ALR 373 applied Yorke v Lucas (1985) 158 CLR 661 applied Décor Corporation Pty Ltd v Dart Industries Inc (1991) 33 FCR 397 applied Symington v Hoechst Schering Agrevo Pty Ltd (1997) 78 FCR 164 cited Tropical Shine Holdings Pty Ltd v Lake Gesture Pty Ltd (1993) 45 FCR 457 cited Silkfield Pty Ltd v Wong (1998) 90 FCR 152 cited Cameron v Qantas Airways Ltd (1993) ATPR 41-251 cited Harrison v Lidoform Pty Ltd (Hely J, 24 November 1998, unreported) cited Dare v Pulham (1982) 148 CLR 658 applied Zhang v Minister for Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs (1993) 45 FCR 384 cited Bass v Permanent Trustee Co Ltd (1999) 161 ALR 399 applied