NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Maait v Chiu Nominees P/L & 2 Ors [2005] NSWSC 451
HEARING DATE(S) : 15 March 2005
JUDGMENT DATE : 11 May 2005
JURISDICTION : Common Law Division
JUDGMENT OF : Master Harrison
DECISION : (1) The appeal is dismissed; (2) The decision of Magistrate P MacMahon dated 8 October 2004 is affirmed; (3) The summons filed 5 November 2004 is dismissed; (4) The plai ntiff is to pay the defendants' costs as agreed or assessed.
CATCHWORDS : Appeal decision of Local Court Magistrate - TPA - reliance
Business Names Act 1962 (NSW) LEGISLATION CITED : Local Courts (Civil Claims) Act 1970 (NSW) - s 69(2) Trades Practices Act 1974 (Cth) - ss 52 & 53
Azzopardi v Tasman UEB Industries Ltd (1985) 4 NSWLR 139 Carr v Neill [1999] NSWSC 1263 Devries v Australian National Railways Commission (1993) 177 CLR 472 R L & D Investments Pty Ltd v Bisby [2002] NSWSC 1082 CASES CITED : State Rail Authority of New South Wales v Earthline Constructions Pty Ltd (in Liq) (1999) 160 ALR 588 Swain v Waverley Municipal Council [2005] HCA 4 Taco Company of Australian Inc v Taco Bell Pty Ltd (1982) 42 ALR 177 Tec & Thomas (Aust) Pty Ltd v Matsumiya Computer Company Pty Ltd (1984) 1 FCR 28
John H Maait t/as John H Maait & Co (Plaintiff)
Chiu Nominees Pty Ltd ACN 009 606 286 (First Defendant) PARTIES : Henery Property Corporation Pty Ltd ACN 007 381 277 (Second Defendant)
Khoury Corporation Pty Ltd t.as Khoury & Partners ACN 003 737 308 (Third Defendant)
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