Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Petrovsky v Southern Adelaide Local Health Network Inc [2024] FCA 396 File number(s): VID 16 of 2024
Judgment of: DOWLING J
Date of judgment: 18 April 2024
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for interlocutory relief – whether serious question to be tried of a joint venture agreement - whether serious question to be tried of a licence – whether serious question to be tried of unconscionable conduct – whether balance of convenience favoured interlocutory relief – whether damages an adequate remedy – application for interlocutory relief dismissed
Legislation: Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) Sch 2 Australian Consumer Law, ss 21 and 22
Cases cited: AHG WA (2015) Pty Ltd v Mercedes-Benz Australia/Pacific Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 1022 Australian Broadcasting Corporation v O'Neill [2006] HCA 46; (2006) 227 CLR 57 Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Kobelt (2019) 267 CLR 1 Bullock v Federated Furnishing Trades Society of Australasia (1985) 5 FCR 464 Ocean Dynamics Charter Pty Ltd v Hamilton Island Enterprises Limited [2015] FCA 460 Samsung Electronics Co Ltd v Apple Inc [2011] FCAFC 156; (2011) 217 FCR 238 Sigma Pharmaceuticals (Australia) Pty Ltd v Wyeth [2009] FCA 595; (2009) 81 IPR 339
Division: General Division
Registry: Victoria
National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations
Sub-area: Commercial Contracts, Banking, Finance and Insurance
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