NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : IceTV Pty Ltd v Ross & ors [2008] NSWSC 1321
HEARING DATE(S) : 14 November 2008 JURISDICTION : Equity Division
JUDGMENT OF : Brereton J
EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE : 17 November 2008
DECISION : Leave granted to file second cross-claim as amended.
CATCHWORDS : PROCEDURE – miscellaneous procedure – cross-claims – application for leave to file cross-claim – where primary proceedings in part concern enforcement of employment restraint of trade covenants against defendant – where leave refused in earlier application to file first cross-claim joining same cross-defendants and raising similar issues – where matter already set down for hearing – whether issues raised by second cross-claim are sufficiently connected with subject of primary proceeding – whether second cross-claim adequately pleaded – CORPORATIONS – oppression – whether enforcing employment restraint of trade covenants against defendant shareholders can amount to oppression – whether pleadings disclose an arguable case that proceedings against the defendants is not in the interest of the company as a whole – whether misleading the Court gives rise to a compensable action for abuse of process – ABUSE OF PROCESS – abuse of process by bringing action for collateral purpose – established principles – whether proceedings brought against defendants disclose a purpose not for the obtaining of relief within the scope of the relevant remedy – TORTS – intimidation – whether pleadings disclose that plaintiffs threatened defendants with unlawful act – TRADE PRACTICES – whether pleadings disclose exclusive dealings, exclusionary arrangements and misuse of market power by plaintiffs – where causes of action pleaded are "special Federal matters" within Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-Vesting) Act 1987, s 3 – whether special circumstances shown to warrant hearing of matters within Supreme Court – unconscionable conduct – whether pleadings disclose unconscionable conduct within the scope of (CTH) Trade Practices Act 1974, ss 51AA, 51AB, and 51AC – "special disadvantage" – whether appointment of administrator to related company raises issues sufficiently connected with primary proceedings
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