Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Fox Symes & Associates Pty Ltd [2005] FCA 1071

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Fox Symes & Associates Pty Ltd [2005] FCA 1071

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application to strike out certain paragraphs of the applicant's statement of claim – whether the statement of claim discloses a reasonable cause of action – where applicant claimed that respondents had contravened provisions of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) and claimed damages pursuant to s 82.

Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) ss 5(1), 40(1)(ha), 40(1)(hb), 40(1)(hc), 40(1)(hd), 185C(1), 185C(2), 185C(3), 185C(4), 185D, 185H, 185I, 185J, 185K, 185M, 185N(1), 185P, 185Q, 185Q(4), 185Q(5), 185R Bankruptcy Legislation Amendment Act 1996 (Cth) Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) ss 51, 52, 53, 75B, 82, 87 Bankruptcy Regulations 1996 (Cth) regs 13.03(1), 13.06 Federal Court Rules O 20 r 2, O 11 r 16 Salemi v Mackellar (1976) 137 CLR 388 cited Chapman v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (2000) 77 SASR 181 followed State of Queensland v Pioneer Concrete (Qld) Pty Ltd [1999] FCA 499 followed Turner v The Bulletin Newspaper Co Pty Ltd (1974) 131 CLR 69 followed Beach Petroleum NL v Johnson (1991) 105 ALR 456 cited Johnson Tiles Pty Ltd v Esso Australia Pty Ltd (2000) 104 FCR 564 followed General Steel Industries Inc v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) (1964) 112 CLR 125 followed Dey v Victorian Railways Commissioners (1949) 78 CLR 62 followed British American Tobacco Australia Ltd v Western Australia [2003] HCA 47 followed Wardley Australia Ltd v Western Australia (1992) 175 CLR 514 followed Yorke v Lucas (1985) 158 CLR 661 followed Quinlivan v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2004] FCAFC 175 followed AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION AND CONSUMER COMMISSION v FOX SYMES & ASSOCIATES PTY LTD & ORS SAD 72 of 2004 LANDER J 5 AUGUST 2005 ADELAIDE