Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
RPR Maintenance Pty Ltd v Marmax Investments Pty Ltd [2012] FCA 681 Citation: RPR Maintenance Pty Ltd v Marmax Investments Pty Ltd [2012] FCA 681
Parties: RPR MAINTENANCE PTY LTD (ACN 003 610 231) v MARMAX INVESTMENTS PTY LTD (ACN 001 147 511) and SPANLINE WEATHERSTRONG BUILDING SYSTEMS PTY LTD (ACN 002 968 087)
File number(s): NSD 804 of 2012
Judge: YATES J
Date of judgment: 29 June 2012
Corrigendum: 9 July 2012
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for interlocutory injunctive relief – common law restraint of trade – whether there is a serious question to be tried – undertaking proffered – whether the balance of convenience lies in favour of granting the interlocutory injunctive relief
Legislation: Restraints of Trade Act 1976 (NSW)
Cases cited: Fleming Bros (Monaro Agencies) Pty Ltd v Smith (1983) ATPR ¶ 40-389 Giblin v Murdoch 1979 SLT (Sh Ct) 5 IRAF Pty Ltd v Graham [1982] 1 NSWLR 419 Knogo Corporation v Halligan (1984) ATPR ¶ 40-460 Nordenfelt v The Maxim Nordenfelt Guns and Ammunition Company Limited [1894] AC 535 Orton v Melman [1981] 1 NSWLR 583 Samsung Electronics Co Ltd v Apple Inc (2011) 286 ALR 257 Heydon JD, The Restraint of Trade Doctrine (3rd ed, LexisNexis Butterworths, 2008)
Date of hearing: 14 June 2012
Place: Sydney
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
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