Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Quigley v Lunchalot Club Pty Ltd [2015] FCA 1421 Citation: Quigley v Lunchalot Club Pty Ltd [2015] FCA 1421
Parties: SHANE QUIGLEY v LUNCHALOT CLUB PTY LTD (ACN 154 977 885) and RICHARD TENSER
File number: NSD 1750 of 2013
Judge: EDMONDS J
Date of judgment: 17 December 2015
Catchwords: CONTRACT – whether more than one contract – terms of contract as to repayment of advance thereunder – whether advance presently repayable – terms on which second advance is repayable – whether advance presently repayable
Legislation: Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) s 82
Cases cited: Masters v Cameron (1954) 91 CLR 353 applied
Dates of hearing: 21, 22, 25 May and 23 June 2015
Place: Sydney
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 52
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr S Wells
Solicitor for the Applicant: Lazarus Legal Group Pty Ltd
Counsel for the Respondents: Mr M Bennett
Solicitor for the Respondents: Cordato Partners
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION NSD 1750 of 2013
BETWEEN: SHANE QUIGLEY
Applicant/Cross-Respondent
AND: LUNCHALOT CLUB PTY LTD (ACN 154 977 885)
First Respondent
RICHARD TENSER
Second Respondent/Cross-Claimant
JUDGE: EDMONDS J DATE OF ORDER: 17 DECEMBER 2015 WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The first respondent pay to the applicant the sum of $75,000 within 21 days of the date of these orders by tender of a bank cheque in that sum. 2. On tender of the sum referred to in Order 1, the applicant tender a signed registrable Transfer of all shares in the first respondent registered in the names of the applicant or any person associated with the applicant in favour of the second respondent or as the second respondent directs. 3. The first respondent pay 50% of the applicant's costs of his claim as agreed or taxed; and the cross-claimant pay the cross-respondent's costs of defending the cross-claim as agreed or taxed. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
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