NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Chardonnay Investments Ltd v INXS Productions Pty Ltd [2010] NSWSC 1061
HEARING DATE(S) : 7 June 2010 JURISDICTION : Equity Division
JUDGMENT OF : Brereton J
EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE : 7 June 2010
DECISION : Grant leave to the plaintiff to amend the Statement of Claim by filing an amended Statement of Claim. The first, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, fourteenth, sixteenth, twenty-first, twenty-fifth, twenty-sixth, twenty-eighth, and thirty-ninth defendants cease to be parties to the proceedings.
CATCHWORDS : PROCEDURE – Supreme Court Procedure – New South Wales – Procedure under Rules of court – Amendment – whether plaintiff should be given leave to amend the statement of claim – whether viable cause of action disclosed against certain defendants – whether defendants could properly be joined where plaintiff not yet able to articulate cause of action against them
CATEGORY : Procedural and other rulings
Chardonnay Investments Limited (plaintiff) INXS Productions Pty Ltd ACN 089 854 599 (first defendant) Andrew Charles Farriss (second defendant) Timothy William Farriss (third defendant) Jonathon James Farriss (fourth defendant) Gary William Beers (fifth defendant) Kirk Pengilly (sixth defendant) Bill Leibowitz (seventh defendant) Ben Pettit (eighth defendant) Hughes Pettit Accounting Services Pty Ltd (ninth defendant) Truism Pty Ltd (tenth defendant) Chris Murphy (eleventh defendant) Warner Chappell Music Inc (twelfth defendant) Jenink Pty Ltd (thirteenth defendant) Six Notes Pty Ltd (fourteenth defendant) Six Notes Tours Inc (fifteenth defendant) Jet Trash Australia Pty Ltd (sixteenth defendant) Tizine Pty Ltd (seventeenth defendant) Boneglide Pty Ltd (eighteenth defendant) Pyramid Music Pty Ltd (nineteenth defendant) INXS Productions Pty Ltd ACN 089 854 599 (twentieth defendant) PARTIES : INXS Publications Pty Ltd ACN 112 650 530 (twenty-first defendant) INXS International Pty Ltd (twenty-second defendant) INXS Global Pty Ltd (twenty-third defendant) INXS TV Pty Ltd (twenty-fourth defendant) INXS Merchandising Pty Ltd (twenty-fifth defendant) INXS Sound & Vision Pty Ltd (twenty-sixth defendant) INXS Music Management Pty Ltd (twenty-seventh defendant) Switched on Touring Pty Ltd (twenty-eighth defendant) Varadis Pty Ltd (twenty-ninth defendant) Rockingham Holdings Pty Ltd (thirtieth defendant) XL Publishing Pty Ltd (thirty-first defendant) Piedmont Station Pty Ltd (thirty-second defendant) Montana Productions Pty Ltd (thirty-third defendant) Sonic Systems Pty Ltd (thirty-fourth defendant) Mangrove Music Studios Pty Ltd (thirty-fifth defendant) INXS Publishing Pty Ltd (thirty-sixth defendant) Mangrove Recording Studios Pty Ltd (thirty-seventh defendant) Mangrove Music Records Pty Ltd (thirty-eighth defendant) A Major Publishing Pty Ltd (thirty-ninth defendant) Beers Investments Pty Ltd (fortieth defendant) INXS BC Pty Ltd (forty-first defendant) INXS AD Pty Ltd (forty-second 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