Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia Punchbowl Casual Dining Pty Ltd v Rashays Cafes & Restaurants Pty Ltd (Trial Judgment) [2024] FCA 1265 File number:
Judgment of: JACKMAN J
Date of judgment: 1 November 2024
Catchwords: CONTRACTS – alleged oral contracts between franchisee and franchisor – whether applicants' evidence concerning disputed conversations should be accepted – application dismissed EVIDENCE – where all witnesses who gave evidence of conversations did so in indirect speech, except on the rare occasions where the witness gave evidence of a verbatim recollection of the words actually used – reasoning of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales in Wild v Meduri considered
Legislation: Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) sch 2 ('Australian Consumer Law') s 18 Competition and Consumer (Industry Codes – Franchising) Regulation 2014 (Cth) cl 6
Chen v Chu [2024] NSWSC 1139 Gan v Xie [2023] NSWCA 163 Kane's Hire Pty Ltd v Anderson Aviation Australia Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 381 Punchbowl Casual Dining Pty Ltd v Rashays Cafes & Restaurants Pty Ltd (No 2) [2024] FCA 127 Cases cited: Wild v Meduri [2024] NSWCA 230 Allsop, James, 'Foreword' in Natalie Cujes, Litigation in the Federal Court (2015) Central Practice Note: National Court Framework and Case Management, CPN-1 Heydon, J.D., Cross on Evidence (14th Australian edn, 2024) Stowe, Vial, Paterson and Temler, "Conversational evidence: A stake in the heart of 'direct speech' & the psychology of conversational memory" (2023, Summer) Bar News
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