All Fasteners(WA) v Grant Caple Pty Ltd - [2003] FMCA 430

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

ALL FASTENERS(WA) v GRANT CAPLE PTY LTD & ORS

[2003] FMCA 430

Trade Practices – Practice & Procedure – joinder of Respondent – amendment of Statement of Claim.

Trade Practices Act 1974, ss.52, 75B(1)(a), 82, 87(2)(a),

Real Estate and Business Agents Act 1978
Corporations Act 2001, s.436A
Federal Magistrates Court Rules 2001 r 18.01

Queensland v JL Holdings Pty Ltd (1997) 189 CLR 146
Sali v SPC Ltd (1993) 67 ALJR 841
Smith and Anor v Gannawarra Shire Council (2002) 4 VR 344

Alpine Holdings Pty Ltd v Warwick Entertainment Centre Pty Ltd (2003) WASC 53(24 March 2003)
Compaq Computer Australia Pty Ltd v Merry (1998) FCA 968; 157 ALR 1 Pereira v Director of Public Prosecutions (1989) 82 ALR 217
ACCC v Michigan Group Pty Ltd (2002) FCA 1439
Amon v Raphael Tuck and Sons (1956) 1 QB 357 at 380
Rogala v Caris Corp. Ltd (1983) (Unreported Burt CJ 27 September 1983
Lib no. 5089)
Vandevell Trustees Ltd v Wright (1931) AC 912
Briggs v Curtis Quick and Associates (1999) WASCA 139

Applicant:

ALL FASTENERS (WA) (A FIRM)

Respondents:

GRANT CAPLE PTY LTD
(ACN 058 483 686),
GRANT CAPLE (DISMISSED),
PERFORMANCE BUSINESS SALES
(A FIRM) & KEN HALL

File No:

WZ 263 of 2002

Delivered on:

30 September 2003

Delivered at:

Melbourne

Hearing date:

5 June 2003

Judgment of:

McInnis FM

REPRESENTATION

Counsel for the Applicant:

Mr A Rumsley

Solicitors for the Applicant:

McKie & Associates

Counsel for the Proposed Fifth Respondent:

Mr T Darbyshire

Solicitors for the Proposed Fifth Respondent:

Kott Gunning

ORDERS

The Applicant be granted leave to join as a Fifth Respondent to the Application Ms Michelle Caple.
The Application be otherwise adjourned for further directions on
28 October 2003 at 9.30 a.m.
The costs related to the decision delivered on 30 September 2003 are reserved.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT
PERTH

WZ 263 of 2002

ALL FASTENERS (WA) (A FIRM)

Applicant

And

GRANT CAPLE PTY LTD,
GRANT CAPLE (DISMISSED),
PERFORMANCE BUSINESS SALES (A FIRM) AND
KEN HALL

Respondents

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

In this matter by way of notice of motion filed 11 April 2003 the applicant seeks leave to amend its application.
The application had originally been filed on 20 December 2002 and had claimed damages against four named respondents pursuant to s.82 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (the Trade Practices Act) in respect of conduct alleged against the respondents to be in breach of s.52 of that Act. In the alternative a declaration was sought that an agreement to purchase a business as a going concern between the applicant and Grant Caple Pty Ltd (the first respondent) dated 16 May 2002 (“the agreement") is void pursuant to s.87(2)(a) of the Trade Practices Act. Further relief was sought by way of a direction that the first respondent authorise the release to the applicant of $40,000 held on trust by a company known as "All Property Settlements Pty Ltd".
A statement of claim filed 20 December 2002 provides…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read All Fasteners(WA) v Grant Caple Pty Ltd and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2003] FMCA 430
Decision Date: 30 September 2003

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of All Fasteners (WA) v Grant Caple Pty Ltd, the Applicant sought leave to join as a Fifth Respondent to the Application, with the addition of Ms Michelle Caple. The dispute involved an application to the court for procedural reasons related to the addition of a party to an existing proceeding. The court addressed the application in the context of ongoing litigation between the Applicant and Grant Caple Pty Ltd.

The legal issues before the court involved the procedural aspect of allowing an additional party to be included in the proceedings. The court needed to determine whether the addition of Ms Michelle Caple as a respondent was justified under the circumstances and whether it would impact the fairness and efficiency of the proceedings. The court also had to consider the timing of the application and its potential effects on the ongoing litigation.

In reaching its decision, the court acknowledged the procedural rules that govern the addition of parties to litigation. The court considered the relevance of Ms Michelle Caple to the issues being litigated and assessed whether her inclusion would significantly alter the nature of the case. The court concluded that the addition was warranted and would not unduly delay or prejudice the other parties. Consequently, the court granted the Applicant's request to join Ms Michelle Caple as a respondent. The court also directed that the matter be adjourned for further directions and reserved the costs related to the decision delivered on 30 September 2003.

Orders

Orders of the court

The Applicant be granted leave to join as a Fifth Respondent to the Application Ms Michelle Caple.

The Application be otherwise adjourned for further directions on

28 October 2003 at 9.30 a.m.

The costs related to the decision delivered on 30 September 2003 are reserved.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.