Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Burger King Corporation v Callas Holdings Pty Limited (in liq) [2005] FCA 278
TRADE PRACTICES – termination of franchise agreements – declaration that franchise agreements have been validly terminated
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for leave to proceed against a company in liquidation BURGER KING CORPORATION v CALLAS HOLDINGS PTY LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) (ABN 009 436 113) NSD 1981 OF 2004 MOORE J 14 MARCH 2005 SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1981 OF 2004
BETWEEN: BURGER KING CORPORATION
APPLICANT
AND: CALLAS HOLDINGS PTY LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION)
ABN 009 436 113
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: MOORE J
DATE OF ORDER: 14 MARCH 2005
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. Leave be granted to proceed against the respondent in liquidation pursuant to section 71B of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). THE COURT DECLARES THAT: 2. The following franchise agreements have been validly terminated by the Applicant: a. The franchise agreement between Callas Holdings Pty Limited (in Liquidation) and Burger King Australia Pty Limited dated 8 December 1999, as subsequently assigned to Burger King Corporation, for the premises known as Lot 12 Lake Haven Shopping Centre, Lake Haven Drive, Lake Haven, NSW; b. The franchise agreement between Callas Holdings Pty Limited (in Liquidation) and Burger King Corporation dated 14 October 2002 for the premises known as 7 Holt Close East Maitland NSW; c. The franchise agreement between Mousum Pty Limited and Burger King Australia Pty Limited dated 4 December 2000, as subsequently assigned to Callas Holdings Pty Limited on 19 July 2002 for the premises known as 561 Peel Street (Corner of Scotts Road) Tamworth NSW; d. The franchise agreement between Callas Holdings Pty Limited and Burger King Australia Pty Limited dated 5 June 2001, as subsequently assigned by Deed of Variation to Burger King Corporation on 5 August 2003 for the premises known as Shop No. TE 09 Erina Fair Shopping Centre, Terrigal Drive, Erina NSW. THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 3. The Respondent pay the Applicant's costs of these proceedings as agreed or assessed as and from 7 March 2005.
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