Bathox Australia Pty Ltd v P J SAS Trading Pty Ltd [2004] FCA 1082

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA Bathox Australia Pty Ltd v P J SAS Trading Pty Ltd [2004] FCA 1082

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Federal Court Rules – application for order that the question of liability be determined separately from the question of damages – principles that govern the circumstances in which an order will be made under O 29 r 2 – whether 'just and convenient' to make an order under O 29 r 2 – factors that govern whether 'just and convenient' to make an order

Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth)

O 29 r 2 of the Federal Court Rules

Clarkel Holdings Pty Ltd (in liq) v Kelly [1999] FCA 1266 referred to Digi International Inc v Stallion Technologies Pty Ltd [2001] QSC 442,(2001) 53 IPR 529 discussed Dr Martens Australia Pty Ltd v BATA Shoe Company of Australia Pty Ltd (1997) 75 FCR 230 referred to Energy Australia v Australian Energy Limited [2001] FCA 1049 followed Highlands Pacific Ltd v Orogen Minerals Ltd [2002] FCA 1104 referred to Idoport Pty ltd v National Australia Bank Ltd [2000] NSWSC 1215 referred to Island Records Ltd v Tring International Plc [1996] 1 WLR 1256 referred to Novartis Crop Protection Australasia Pty Limited v Orica Australia Pty Limited [2001] FCA 1013 referred to Reading Australia Pty Ltd v Australian Mutual Provident Society [1999] FCA 718 followed Tallglen Pty Ltd v Pay TV Holdings Pty Ltd (1996) 22 ACSR 130 referred to Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board (2001) 206 CLR 1 followed BATHOX AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED v P J SAS TRADING PTY LIMITED & ORS N 910 OF 2003 STONE J 24 AUGUST 2004 SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 910 OF 2003

BETWEEN: BATHOX AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED

APPLICANT

AND: P J SAS TRADING PTY LIMITED

FIRST RESPONDENT

PAUL SASSINE

SECOND RESPONDENT