FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Delta Metallics Pty Ltd v King (No 2) [2012] FCA 1328
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA | |
DATE OF ORDER: | |
WHERE MADE: |
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
(1) The first respondent pay $12,253 to the applicant by 14 December 2012 on account of profits made by the first respondent in relation to the tournaments held on 31 July 2010, 11 December 2010, 16 April 2011 and 23 July 2011.
(2) The first respondent pay the applicant’s costs of and incidental to the hearing on 23 November 2012.
Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY | |
GENERAL DIVISION | VID 131 of 2011 |
BETWEEN: | DELTA METALLICS PTY LTD Applicant
|
AND: | JOSHUA NATHAN KING (TRADING AS WHITE COLLAR BOXING INC) First Respondent ADAM PARTRIDGE Second Respondent BOXING NEW SOUTH WALES INCORPORATED Third Respondent BOXING AUSTRALIA (NSW) INCORPORATED Fourth Respondent
|
JUDGE: | MIDDLETON J |
DATE: | 23 NOVEMBER 2012 |
PLACE: | MELBOURNE |
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
1 On 9 October 2012 in this proceeding, I effectively determined liability in relation to the first respondent (upon dismissing an application being made by the first respondent to set aside a default judgment previously entered against him), and made orders that the further hearing of the proceeding be adjourned to 9.30 am on 23 November 2012.
2 Application has now been made by the applicant this day upon proper notice to the first respondent that the first respondent pay $12,253 to the applicant by 14 December 2012 on account of profits made by the first respondent in relation to the tournaments held on 31 July 2010, 11 December 2010, 16 April 2011 and 23 July 2011, and that the first respondent pay the applicant’s costs of and incidental to the hearing on 23 November 2012.
3 In support of the application, affidavit material has been filed and served, and the applicant relies in part on an affidavit sworn on 3 September 2012 where the first respondent stated that the total net profit derived by him in respect of the tournaments was $12,253. The applicant has elected to seek an account of profits, and proceeds on the basis of the affidavit of the first respondent plus affidavit material in support of the application filed by the applicant itself.
4 In the course of discussion before me today, the first respondent raised nothing that would impact upon the applicant being now entitled to an account of profits, nor impacting upon the amount which has been stated by the first respondent to be the total net profit derived, namely the sum of $12,253.
5 In the circumstances, I am satisfied based upon the material before the Court that the applicant’s proposed order in relation to the account of profits be made, and I propose to make that order.
6 Therefore the Court orders:
(1) The first respondent pay $12,253 to the applicant by 14 December 2012 on account of profits made by the first respondent in relation to the tournaments held on 31 July 2010, 11 December 2010, 16 April 2011 and 23 July 2011.
(2) The first respondent pay the applicant’s costs of and incidental to the hearing on 23 November 2012.
I certify that the preceding six (6) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Middleton. |
Associate:
