Hilad v SCI [1999] NSWSC 486

New South Wales Supreme Court CITATION : Hilad v SCI [1999] NSWSC 486 CURRENT JURISDICTION : Commercial FILE NUMBER(S) : 50008/99 HEARING DATE(S) : 14, 21 May 1999 JUDGMENT DATE : 27 May 1999

Hilad Corporation Pty Limited - Plaintiff PARTIES : SCI (Sales Curve Interactive) Limited - First Defendant Bryan Joseph Ennis (also known as Bill Ennis) - Second Defendant JUDGMENT OF : Rolfe J

COUNSEL : Mr M.J. Slattery QC/Mr G.A. Seib - Plaintiff Mr I.M. Jackman - Defendants SOLICITORS : Kemp Strang - Plaintiff Minter Ellison - Defendants CATCHWORDS : Application by defendants to stay proceedings pursuant to Part 11 rule 8 and by the plaintiff for leave to proceed pursuant to Part 10 rule 2.; Necessity for plaintiff to establish jurisdictional nexus through Part 10 rule 1A.; Onus on the plaintiff: The News Corporation Limited v Lenfest Communications Inc (1996) 21 ASCR 552 and the cases therein cited applied.; "Tacking" of causes of action not permitted: W.F.M. Motors Pty Limited v Maydwell (Bryson J - 23 April 1993 - unreported; C.E. Heath Underwriting and Insurance (Australia) Pty Limited & Anor v Barden & Ors (Rolfe J - 19 October 1994 - unreported; Australian Iron and Steel v Jumbo Scheepvaart (1988) 14 NSWLR 507; Ramcorp Limited & Ors v DFC Financial Services Limited & Ors (Waddell CJinEq - 30 April 1990 - unreported).; C.E. Heath Underwriting and Insurance (Australia) Pty Limited & Anor v Barden & Ors and the cases referred to therein and News Corporation followed.; Onus on party where a "choice of court" provision is in a contract: Akai Pty Limited v People's Insurance Co Limited (1995) 126 FLR 204 and (1996) 188 CLR 418 followed. Policy considerations underlying this approach noted.; Construction point: construction of a commercial contract: Fitzgerald & Anor v Masters (1956) 95 CLR 420; Australian Broadcasting Commission v Australasian Performing Right Association Limited (1973) 129 CLR 99; Continental Bank NA v Aeakos Companie Naviera SA & Ors [1994] 1 WLR 528 followed. DECISION : (1) The service of the Summons filed on 28 January 1999 on each of the defendants be set aside in whole.; (2) The proceedings commenced by that Summons be stayed generally.; (3) The plaintiff's Notice of Motion filed on 19 April 1999 be dismissed.; (4) The plaintiff pay the defendants' costs of the proceedings including both Notices of Motion.