NSW Caselaw
Local Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Video Ezy International Pty Ltd v Sedema Pty Ltd and Ors [2013] NSWLC 24 Hearing dates: 10/09/2012, 31/10/2012, 21/01/2013, 1/02/2013 Decision date: 14 February 2013 Jurisdiction: Civil Before: Magistrate Favretto Decision: Verdict for the defendants/cross-claimants Catchwords: CONTRACTS - franchise agreement - unpaid franchise fees - cross-claim -operation of similar online business by related entity of franchisor - whether franchisor breached restrictive covenant not to compete with franchisee within exclusive territory - unconscionable conduct - obligation to act in good faith Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) Cases Cited: Attorney-General (NSW) v World Best Holdings Ltd (2005) 63 NSWLR 557 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v CG Berbatis Holdings Pty Limited (2003) 214 CLR 51 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Simply No-Knead (Franchising) Pty Ltd (2000) 104 FCR 253; [2000] FCA 1365 Australian Securities and Investments Commission v National Exchange Pty Ltd (2005) 148 FCR 132 Burger King Corporation v Hungry Jack's Pty Limited (2001) 69 NSWLR 558 Campbell v Backoffice Investments Pty Ltd [2008] NSWCA 95 Canon Australia Pty Ltd v Patton (2007) 244 ALR 759 Carlton & United Breweries Ltd v Tooth & Co Ltd (1986) 7 IPR 581 Franklins Pty Ltd v Metcash Trading Ltd [2009] NSWCA 407 Hurley v McDonald's Australia Ltd [1999] FCA 1728; (2000) ATPR 41-74 Idoport Pty Ltd v National Australia Bank Ltd [1999] NSWSC 828 Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298 Louth v Diprose (1992) 175 CLR 621 Macdonald v Australian Wool Innovation Ltd [2005] FCA 105 Pacific Carriers Limited v BNP Paribas [2004] HCA 35 Royal Botanic Gardens v South Sydney City Council (2002) 240 CLR 45 Toll (FGCT) Pty Limited v Alphapharm Pty Limited [2004] HCA 52 Trego v Hunt [1896] AC 7 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Statement of claim: Video Ezy International Pty Ltd (plaintiff) Sedema Pty Ltd (1st defendant) Scott Newman (2nd defendant) Samantha Newman (3rd defendant) Lorraine Charnas (4th 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