Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Sareena Enterprises Pty Ltd v Prospex Profile Pty Ltd [2000] FCA 1527 PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – pleadings – whether application should be dismissed – whether statement of claim should be struck out – where statement of claim does not sufficiently set out a cause of action - whether it is necessary for a statement of claim to describe information claimed to be confidential in relation to an action for breach of confidence – whether it is necessary for a statement of claim to indicate the origin of representations said to give rise to a breach of s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) – whether sufficient to plead that a respondent induced a breach of contract INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – confidential information – whether it is necessary for a statement of claim to describe the information claimed to be confidential CONTRACTS – enforceability by third party – where the parties to a contract purport to vary that contract to benefit a third party – whether third party can enforce the contract as varied CONTRACTS – inducing breach of contract – whether sufficient to plead that a respondent induced a breach of contract – necessity of pleading that the respondent intentionally or knowingly induced the breach of contract TRADE PRACTICES – consumer protection - whether it is necessary for a statement of claim to indicate the origin of representations alleged to give rise to a breach of s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) Federal Court Rules O11 r 16, O 20 r 2 Dey v Victorian Railway Commissioners (1948-1949) 78 CLR 62 at 91 applied General Steel Industries Inc. v Commissioner for Railways (N.S.W.) (1964) 112 CLR 125 at 129 applied Empire Shipping Co Inc v Owners of the Ship "Shin Kobe Maru" (1991) 104 ALR 489 referred to Pancontinental Mining Ltd v Posgold Investments Pty Ltd (1994) 121 ALR 405 referred to Banque Commerciale S.A. en Liquidation v Akhil Holdings Ltd (1990) 169 CLR 279 at 286 applied Balkin and Davis Law of Torts 2nd ed. 1996 at p. 603 SAREENA ENTERPRISES PTY LTD V PROSPEX PROFILE PTY LTD N 1101 of 2000 STONE J 27 OCTOBER 2000 SYDNEY
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