Australian Communications and Media Authority v Red Telecom Pty Ltd [2020] FCA 996

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Australian Communications and Media Authority v Red Telecom Pty Ltd [2020] FCA 996 File number(s): NSD 2167 of 2019

Judge(s): PERRY J

Date of judgment: 15 July 2020

Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for judgment in default by reason of non-compliance with Court order – self-executing orders made

Legislation: Telecommunications Act 1997 (Cth) Telecommunications (Consumer Protection and Service Standards Act 1999 (Cth) Federal Court Rules 2011

Cases cited: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Dataline [2006] FCA 1427; (2006) 236 ALR 665 Commonwealth of Australia v Harrison [2019] FCA 937

Date of hearing: 9 July 2020

Registry: New South Wales

Division: General Division

National Practice Area: Other Federal Jurisdiction

Category: Catchwords

Number of paragraphs: 27

Counsel for the Applicant: Ms M Gaven

Solicitor for the Applicant: Australian Government Solicitor

Solicitor for the Respondent: Mr T Sperber of TPS&Co

16 July 2020 Orders made on 9 July 2020 have been added

ORDERS NSD 2167 of 2019

BETWEEN: AUSTRALIAN COMMUNICATIONS AND MEDIA AUTHORITY Applicant

AND: RED TELECOM PTY LTD (ACN 151363147) & ANOR First Respondent

NICHOLAS KONTAXIS Second Respondent

JUDGE: PERRY J DATE OF ORDER: 9 July 2020

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The applicant's interlocutory application filed on 7 July 2020 is allowed in part, namely to the extent that self-executing orders have been made as set out in paragraphs 2 and 3 below. 2. Order 3 of the orders made on 10 June 2020 is varied so as to require that the first and second respondents: (a) on before 5pm on Friday 10 July 2020, provide answers to the particulars sought at paragraphs 8 and 9 of the letter dated 4 June 2020 from the solicitors for the applicant; (b) on or before 5pm on Tuesday 21 July 2020, provide answers to the remaining particulars sought in the letter dated 4 June 2020 from the solicitors for the applicant. 3. If the first and second respondents fail to comply with orders 2(a) or order 2(b) above, then in accordance with rule 5.21(d) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 judgment in respect of liability issues only with respect to KJ Real Estate and Ms Diana Canepa be entered for the applicant against them. 4. To the extent that the interlocutory application dated 7 July 2020 seeks an order for indemnity costs, the application is reserved. 5. The application is listed for a case management hearing and, if an oral hearing is required the hearing of the application for indemnity costs, at 9:30am on Thursday 23 July 2020. THE COURT NOTES THAT: 6. The respondents are to use their best endeavours to respond to all particulars by 5pm on 17 July 2020. 7. When reasons are published for the orders 1, 2 and 3 above, timetabling orders will be made for the filing of further evidence and submissions on the issue of indemnity costs. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.