Kalipoll Pty Limited v TMG Developments Pty LimitedFish20 Pty Limited v TMG Developments Pty LimitedBread of France (NSW) Pty Limited v TMG Developments Pty Limited [2006] NSWDC 111

New South Wales District Court

CITATION: Kalipoll Pty Limited v TMG Developments Pty LimitedFish20 Pty Limited v TMG Developments Pty LimitedBread of France (NSW) Pty Limited v TMG Developments Pty Limited [2006] NSWDC 111

HEARING DATE(S): 21/11/06

JUDGMENT DATE: 30 November 2006

JUDGMENT OF: Rolfe DCJ

DECISION: 1. All three motions are dismissed.; 2. Costs should follow the event on the ordinary basis.; 3. I direct the exhibits be returned.

CATCHWORDS: Applications for proceedings to be heard together - Exercise of Court's discretion in circumstances where the admissibility of similar fact evidence will be a significant issue at trial - Utility of making orders - Applications refused.

LEGISLATION CITED: Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) Evidence Act 1995

Mister Figgins Pty Ltd v Centrepoint Freehold Pty Limited 36 ALR 23 CASES CITED: D F Lyons Pty Limited v Commonwealth Bank of Australia (1991) 28 FCR 597 Jospin v Copulos Venture Capitol BC 9405953 Jacara v Perpetual Trustees WA (Ltd) (2000) FCA 1986

Kalipoll Pty Limited (Plaintiff/Applicant) PARTIES: Fish20Pty Limited (Plaintiff/Applicant) Bread of France (NSW) Pty Limited (Plaintiff/Applicant) TMG Developments Pty Limited (Defendant/Respondent)

FILE NUMBER(S): 2893/04; 2894/04; 2895/04

COUNSEL: R Alkadamani (Plaintiffs/Applicants) R McHugh SC with K Richardson (Defendant/Respondent)

JUDGMENT

1 In each of these three cases the plaintiff filed a Notice of Motion on 28 July 2006 seeking orders that the proceedings be heard together and the evidence in one proceeding be evidence in the other; alternatively, that the proceedings be consolidated; alternatively, that the proceedings be joined.