FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA G R Finance Ltd v Barnden Partners Property Pty Ltd (in liq) (No 2) [2012] FCA 259 Citation: G R Finance Ltd v Barnden Partners Property Pty Ltd (in liq) (No 2) [2012] FCA 259 Parties: G R FINANCE LTD v BARNDEN PARTNERS PROPERTY PTY LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) ACN 007 254 677 and ROBERT GREY CHAFFEY BARNDEN File number: VID 438 of 2011 Judge: MURPHY J Date of judgment: 20 March 2012 Date of hearing: Heard on the papers Place: Melbourne Division: GENERAL DIVISION Category: No catchwords Number of paragraphs: 3 Solicitor for the Applicant Mr V Stefano, Wilmoth Field Warne Lawyers IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION VID 438 of 2011 BETWEEN: G R FINANCE LTD Applicant AND: BARNDEN PARTNERS PROPERTY PTY LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) ACN 007 254 677 First Respondent ROBERT GREY CHAFFEY BARNDEN Second Respondent JUDGE: MURPHY J DATE OF ORDER: 20 MARCH 2012 WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The second respondent pay damages to the applicant pursuant to s 82 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) and/or s 159 of the Fair Trading Act 1999 (Vic) in the amount of $854,267.32, additional to the damages ordered on 22 December 2011. 2. The applicant serve a copy of this order on the second respondent within seven days by mailing it to his address at Block 9, Sultana Avenue, Irymple, Victoria. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011. IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION VID 438 of 2011 BETWEEN: G R FINANCE LTD Applicant AND: BARNDEN PARTNERS PROPERTY PTY LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) ACN 007 254 677 First Respondent ROBERT GREY CHAFFEY BARNDEN Second Respondent JUDGE: MURPHY J DATE: 20 MARCH 2012 PLACE: MELBOURNE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 I handed down judgment in this matter on 22 December 2011, assessing damages against the second respondent in the sum of $3,087,845.61. 2 I noted in the judgment that I declined to make any order in relation to a loan from the applicant to the respondents described by the applicant as Loan 2. At the time there was no affidavit before me which deposed in clear terms as to the existence of that loan or the quantum of any claim for damages in that regard. I provided time to file a further affidavit with regard to Loan 2. 3 The Court has now been provided with the affidavit of Philip John Boyle sworn 9 February 2012 which properly sets out the applicant's claim in regard to Loan 2. I have made an order for a further $854,267.32 in damages including interest accrued to 20 March 2012 to be paid by the second respondent to the applicant. I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Murphy. Associate: Dated: 20 March 2012