Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Contact Plus Group Pty Ltd (in liq) (No 2) [2006] FCA 695

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Contact Plus Group Pty Ltd (in liq) (No 2) [2006] FCA 695

CONTEMPT OF COURT – jurisdiction to punish contempt – service and enforcement of orders under Federal Court Rules – where final orders by consent required respondent to provide documents to specified persons – where emails and CD-ROM provided were password protected – where password not supplied and conditions imposed to obtain password – where incomplete documents provided – whether non-compliance with orders was technical – whether non-compliance with orders was deliberate and wilful – contempt established – consideration of appropriate penalty – indemnity costs order PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – order required provision of disclosure document under Trade Practices (Industry Codes – Franchising) Regulations 1998 (Cth) – where respondent company in liquidation – whether order was sufficiently clear and unambiguous and capable of compliance – whether respondent in contempt for non-compliance with requirements of disclosure document – no contempt established – order vacated

Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 31 Federal Court Rules O 37, O 40 Trade Practices (Industry Codes – Franchising) Regulations 1998 (Cth) Re Colina; Ex parte Torney (1999) 200 CLR 386 cited Witham v Holloway (1995) 183 CLR 525 cited Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v INFO4PC.com Pty Ltd (2002) 121 FCR 24 considered Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Hughes [2001] FCA 38 considered Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Globex Systems Pty Ltd (2005) 27 ATPR 42-069 cited Deputy Commissioner of Taxation (Cth) v Hickey and Horne (1999) 42 ATR 229 cited Australasian Meat Industry Employees' Union v Mudginberri Station Pty Ltd (1986) 161 CLR 98 considered Advan Investments Pty Ltd v Dean Gleeson Motor Sales Pty Ltd [2003] VSC 201 cited Re Perkins; Mesto v Galpin [1998] 4 VR 505 cited McNair Anderson Associates Pty Ltd v Hinch [1985] VR 309 cited Australian Consumer and Competition Commission v Contact Plus Group Pty Ltd (in liq) [2006] FCA 396 referred to Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Matthews (1992) 32 ACSR 404 cited Louis Vuitton Malletier SA v Design Elegance Pty Ltd (2006) 67 IPR 611 cited Keeley v Mr Justice Brooking (1979) 143 CLR 162 cited Gallagher v Durack (1983) 152 CLR 238 cited Smith v The Queen (1991) 25 NSWLR 1 cited Australian Prudential Regulation Authority v Simiton (No 3) [2006] FCA 397 cited Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Jayco Pty Ltd [2003] FCA 94 considered Degmam Pty Ltd (in liq) v Wright (No 2) [1983] 2 NSWLR 354 cited