FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Dimension Data Aust Pty Ltd v Kepper [2000] FCA 218
TRADE PRACTICES – application for leave to appeal from order refusing strikeout application – accessorial liability – leave refused
Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) s 75B
Wheeler Grace v Pierucci Pty Limited and Wright (1989) 16 IPR 189 at 209 mentioned
Paper Products Pty Limited v Tomlinson's Rockdale Limited (1994) ATPR 41,315 at 42,204 mentioned
DIMENSION DATA AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED (ACN 078 906 564) v
GEORGE JOHN KEPPER AND OTHERS
NG 1323 OF 1998
HILL, HEEREY AND HELY JJ
25 FEBRUARY 2000
SYDNEY
|
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
|
|
NG 1323 OF 1998 |
ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT
|
BETWEEN: |
DIMENSION DATA AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED (ACN 078 906 564) APPELLANT
|
|
AND: |
GEORGE JOHN KEPPER FIRST RESPONDENT
JOSEPH ALEXANDER SKRYZNSKI SECOND RESPONDENT
KFT INVESTMENTS PTY LIMITED (ACN 005 144 945) THIRD RESPONDENT
MASAKI PTY LIMITED (ACN 006 357 731) FOURTH RESPONDENT
AUSTRALIAN MEZZANINE INVESTMENTS PTY LIMITED (ACN 003 409 747) FIFTH RESPONDENT
|
|
DATE OF ORDER: |
|
|
WHERE MADE: |
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. Application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
2. Applicant to pay respondents’ costs, including reserved costs.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
|
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA |
|
|
NG 1323 OF 1998 |
ON APPEAL FROM A JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT
|
JUDGES: |
|
|
DATE: |
|
|
PLACE: |
EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
THE COURT:
1 This is an application for leave to appeal against a decision of Moore J. His Honour dismissed an application by PriceWaterhouseCoopers for an order striking out the cross-claim against them. The circumstances of this case relevant to the present application are set out in his Honour's judgment and it is not necessary to repeat them. Leave should be refused. It seems at least arguable that the state of mind required to establish accessorial liability under s 75B of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) does not necessarily involve actual subjective knowledge of contravention of s 52.
2 If that is so, it is conceivable a person could be liable under s 75B whilst still acting in good faith. The authorities referred to by his Honour: Wheeler Grace v Pierucci Pty Limited and Wright (1989) 16 IPR 189 at 209 and Paper Products Pty Limited v Tomlinson's Rockdale Limited (1994) ATPR 41,315 at 42,204, lend support to such a view. His Honour was, in our view, clearly right in declining to make a final determination on an important point of law without a full investigation of the factual basis. The application for leave to appeal is refused. There will be an order that the appellant pay the respondents’ costs.
|
I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justices Hill, Heerey and Hely. |
Associate:
Dated: 25 February 2000
|
Counsel for the Appellant: |
B W Rayment QC and T G R Parker |
|
|
|
|
Solicitor for the Appellant: |
Coudert Brothers |
|
|
|
|
Counsel for the First, Second, Third and Fourth Respondents: |
A S Bell |
|
|
|
|
Solicitors for the First, Second, Third and Fourth Respondents: |
Atanaskovic Hartnell |
|
|
|
|
Counsel for the Fifth Respondent: |
D J Hammerschlag and R I Bellamy |
|
|
|
|
Solicitor for the Fifth Respondent: |
Cowley Hearne |
|
|
|
|
Date of Hearing: |
25 February 2000 |
|
|
|
|
Date of Judgment: |
25 February 2000 |
