Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Breezway Australia (Holdings) Pty Ltd v Preference Manufacturing Pte Ltd [2011] FCA 764 Citation: Breezway Australia (Holdings) Pty Ltd v Preference Manufacturing Pte Ltd [2011] FCA 764
Parties: BREEZWAY AUSTRALIA (HOLDINGS) PTY LTD ACN 105 521 640 v PREFERENCE MANUFACTURING PTE LTD, PREFERENCE MANUFACTURING (AUST) PTY LTD ACN 100 826 695, LGI AUSTRALIA PTY LTD ACN 090 088 289, PREFERENCE MANUFACTURING PTE LTD, PREFERENCE MANUFACTURING (AUST) PTY LTD ACN 100 826 695, LGI AUSTRALIA PTY LTD ACN 090 088 289, BREEZWAY AUSTRALIA (HOLDINGS) PTY LTD ACN 105 521 640 and BREEZWAY AUSTRALIA PTY LTD ACN 081 897 823
File number: QUD 45 of 2011
Judge: REEVES J
Date of judgment: 11 July 2011
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application pursuant to O 29 r 2(a) of the Federal Court Rules – application for separate trial of liability and damages – summary and consideration of the principles governing the separation of liability and damages – whether liability for misleading and deceptive conduct can be heard separately – consideration of factors relevant to the discretion in O 29 r 2 (a) Held – when issues of liability involve proving causation those issues should not be tried separately – application dismissed
Legislation: O 29 r 2(a) of the Federal Court Rules Patents Act 1990 (Cth) ss 122, 128 Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) s 18, Sch 2 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 37M
Cases cited: Tallglen Pty Ltd v Pay TV Holdings Pty Ltd (1996) 22 ACSR 130 Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board (2001) 206 CLR 1; [2001] HCA 19 Olbers Co Ltd v Commonwealth of Australia (No 3) [2003] FCA 651 Spirits International B.V. v Federal Treasury Enterprise (FKP) Sojuzplodoimport [2011] FCAFC 69 Idoport Pty Ltd v National Australia Bank Ltd [2000] NSWSC 1215 Reading Australia Pty Ltd v Australian Mutual Provident Society [1999] FCA 718 Novartis Crop Protection Australasia Pty Ltd v Orica Australia Pty Ltd [2001] FCA 1013 Fleming's Nurseries Pty Ltd v Hannaford [2008] FCA 591 Wardley Australia Ltd v State of Western Australia (1992) 175 CLR 514 Rhone-Poulenc Agrochimie SA v UIM Chemical Services Pty Ltd (1985) 10 FCR 567
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