|ACCC v Air New Zealand Ltd (FCA) - trade practices - price fixing - surcharges on carriage of air cargo - claims against airlines dismissed
|Firebird Global Master Fund II Ltd v Republic of Nauru (No 2) (NSWCA) - stay - application for special leave to appeal to High Court - limited and conditional stay of orders
|Lawrence v Martin (NSWSC) - succession - family provision order for deceased's de facto partner
|International Petroleum Investment Company v Independent Public Business Corporation of Papua New Guinea (NSWSC) - contract - bond deed poll - two independent valuations of shares' market value - one valuation binding
|Lew Footwear Holdings Pty Ltd v Madden International Ltd (No 2) (NSWSC) - stay - statement of claim served on overseas defendant - strongly arguable case - stay refused
|Amricama Pty Ltd v Red Carpet Real Estate (QSC) - landlord and tenant - rent to be paid under renewed lease - valuer's determination of current market rent of no effect
|Summaries With Link (Five Minute Read)
|ACCC v Air New Zealand Ltd  FCA 1157
Federal Court of Australia
Trade practices - price fixing - ACCC sued Air New Zealand and Garuda Indonesia alleging collusive behaviour in fixing of surcharges and fees on carriage of air cargo from overseas into Australia contrary to ss45 & 45A Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) - held: s45 applied only to competition in a market in Australia - ACCC's case was limited (in all but one minor case) to flights from airports outside Australia into airports inside Australia - no market in Australia was involved - surcharges were imposed and collected at origin airports - competition which occurred between airlines and which surcharges interfered with was competition in markets in Hong Kong, Singapore and Indonesia and not competition in any market in Australia - prices may have been affected in Australia, but that did not mean market in which airlines were competing was located here - actions dismissed.
|Firebird Global Master Fund II Ltd v Republic of Nauru (No 2)  NSWCA 375
Court of Appeal of New South Wales
Stay - Court set aside registration of foreign judgment obtained by Firebird against Nauru and also set aside garnishee order - effect of orders was to release both bank and Nauru from any constraints on dealing with money subject of accounts held by Nauru with bank - Court granted stay against possibility Firebird might appeal to High Court - Firebird sought special leave to appeal to High Court - Firebird sought extension of stay limited to certain accounts held by bank - held: there were a number of aspects of proceedings which were unusual if not unique in jurisprudence in Australia - there were respectable arguments to be put on either side and these were matters as to which High Court might well be willing to grant special leave to appeal - clearly arguable that at least part of funds should be frozen to preserve subject matter of litigation - Court satisfied it was appropriate to grant a limited and conditional stay of orders - Firebird to provide an undertaking to pursue expedition in High Court and to pursue its proceedings expeditiously.
Firebird Global Master Fund II Ltd
|Lawrence v Martin  NSWSC 1506
Supreme Court of New South Wales
Succession - plaintiff sought family provision order pursuant to Succession Act 2006 (NSW) on basis she was living in de facto relationship with deceased at time of his death - held: no dispute that plaintiff was living in de facto relationship with deceased at time of death - plaintiff was eligible person under s57(1)(b) - Court satisfied for purposes of s59(1)(c) that deceased did not make adequate provision for proper maintenance or advancement in life of plaintiff - Court satisfied lump sum provision should be made for plaintiff out of deceased's estate.
|International Petroleum Investment Company v Independent Public Business Corporation of Papua New Guinea  NSWSC 1289
Supreme Court of New South Wales
Contract - defendant (IPBC) issued Exchangeable Bonds to plaintiff (IPIC) - IPBC raised amount which it used to finance participation in gas project - terms and conditions of Bonds contained in Bond Deed Poll made by IPBC - Maturity Date of Bonds was 5 March 2014 - mature Bonds subject to mandatory exchange into ordinary shares in capital of company whose shares were listed on Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) - if, on Maturity Date, Principal Amount of Bonds being redeemed exceeded Current Market Value of all of the Shares, IPBC as Issuer was to pay to IPIC as Holder a Cash Settlement Amount equivalent to shortfall - conditions incorporated mechanism to determine Current Market Value of Shares - terms and conditions included procedure for parties to appoint Independent Valuer to assess market value and average of two valuations taken - IPBC issued an Alternative Valuation Notice (AVN) - parties each appointed an Independent Valuer - whether AVN was invalid - whether valuations by Independent Valuers were binding on parties - held: AVN valid - valuation by Independent Valuer appointed by IPBC not binding - valuation by Independent Valuer appointed by IPIC binding.
International Petroleum Investment Company
|Lew Footwear Holdings Pty Ltd v Madden International Ltd (No 2)  VSC 541
Supreme Court of Victoria
Stay - service - further hearing of application by defendant (Madden) to have proceeding stayed permanently - Madden was served in Hong Kong with writ filed in Supreme Court of Victoria - Court found plaintiff (Lew) failed to establish strongly arguable case that relevant conditions of r7.01(1)(i) and (j) Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2005 (Vic) had been met - Lew had pleaded reliance as a necessary element of relevant causes of action but Court found Lew failed to establish strongly arguable case in this regard - it followed Lew had not established strongly arguable case that a tort had been committed or damage had been caused by tortious act or omission - Court proposed to stay proceedings permanently but deferred order - Lew filed further affidavits seeking to establish case on reliance - held: on totality of evidence, Lew established strongly arguable case - Lew entitled to proceed with its contractual claims and representations claims - summons dismissed.
Lew Footwear Holdings Pty Ltd
|Amricama Pty Ltd v Red Carpet Real Estate  QSC 267
Supreme Court of Queensland
Landlord and tenant - applicant leased retail shop from respondent - lease was subject to provisions of Retail Shop Leases Act 1994 (Qld) - applicant exercised option for further 5 years - dispute concerned rent to be paid under renewed lease - s27A allowed for determination of market rent before an option to renew - s28 provided for current market rent to be determined by specialist retail valuer - valuer agreed upon by parties in mediation as part of QCAT proceedings was not a specialist retail valuer - lease did not provide for rent to be determined in a particular way - respondent refused to provide lease in registrable form - applicant sought declarations and order that respondent deliver up a lease in registrable form containing a provision for rent in accordance with the determination of valuer - held: valuer was not a specialist retail valuer - valuation was not a determination of current market rent referred to in s27A - applicant could not rely on valuation for purposes of renewed lease - respondent could not be estopped, nor could it be said to have waived its rights under the Act - application dismissed.
Amricama Pty Ltd