Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Chaste Corporation Pty Ltd (No 4)

[2013] FCA 1110

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Australian Competition & Consumer Commission v Chaste Corporation Pty Ltd (No 4) [2013] FCA 1110

Citation:

Australian Competition & Consumer Commission v Chaste Corporation Pty Ltd (No 4) [2013] FCA 1110

Parties:

AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION & CONSUMER COMMISSION v CHASTE CORPORATION PTY LTD (DEREGISTERED) ACN 089 837 239, BRADDON RALPH WEBB, ORLAWOOD PTY LTD ACN 059 294 334, PETER CLARENCE FOSTER, SEAN PETRIE ALLEN COUSINS, CONSTANTINE XENOUDAKIS, KEVIN ANTHONY MCMULLAN, ALAN KENNETH COOPER and STEPHEN D'ALTON

File number:

QUD 252 of 2001

Judge:

LOGAN J

Date of judgment:

24 October 2013

Catchwords:

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for leave to withdraw as solicitors for Fourth Respondent – where absence of instructions for Fourth Respondent and where continuing to act would cause professional embarrassment to legal representatives

Held: leave to withdraw be allowed

Date of hearing:

24 October 2013

Place:

Brisbane

Division:

GENERAL DIVISION

Category:

Catchwords

Number of paragraphs:

6

Counsel for the Applicant:

Mr D Kent

Solicitor for the Applicant:

Corrs Chambers Westgarth

Counsel for the Fourth Respondent:

Mr L Burrow

Solicitor for the Fourth Respondent:

Fisher Dore

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION	QUD 252 of 2001

BETWEEN: AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION  & CONSUMER COMMISSION
Applicant

AND:

CHASTE CORPORATION PTY LTD (DEREGISTERED) ACN 089 837 239
First Respondent

BRADDON RALPH WEBB
Second Respondent

ORLAWOOD PTY LTD ACN 059 294 334
Third Respondent

PETER CLARENCE FOSTER
Fourth Respondent

SEAN PETRIE ALLEN COUSINS
Fifth Respondent

CONSTANTINE XENOUDAKIS
Sixth Respondent

KEVIN ANTHONY MCMULLAN
Seventh Respondent

ALAN KENNETH COOPER
Eighth Respondent

STEPHEN D'ALTON
Ninth Respondent

JUDGE:	LOGAN J
DATE OF ORDER:	24 OCTOBER 2013
WHERE MADE:	BRISBANE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The solicitors for the Fourth Respondent be granted leave to withdraw.

Note:Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION	QUD 252 of 2001

BETWEEN: AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION  & CONSUMER COMMISSION
Applicant

AND:

CHASTE CORPORATION PTY LTD (DEREGISTERED) ACN 089 837 239
First Respondent

BRADDON RALPH WEBB
Second Respondent

ORLAWOOD PTY LTD ACN 059 294 334
Third Respondent

PETER CLARENCE FOSTER
Fourth Respondent

SEAN PETRIE ALLEN COUSINS
Fifth Respondent

CONSTANTINE XENOUDAKIS
Sixth Respondent

KEVIN ANTHONY MCMULLAN
Seventh Respondent

ALAN KENNETH COOPER
Eighth Respondent

STEPHEN D'ALTON
Ninth Respondent

JUDGE:	LOGAN J
DATE:	24 OCTOBER 2013
PLACE:	BRISBANE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. When this matter was called on for hearing this morning at the appointed time, Mr Burrow of counsel, who was instructed by Mr Fisher of the solicitors firm Fisher Dore, and who has, on those instructions, previously appeared for the Fourth Respondent in these proceedings, Mr Foster, sought leave to withdraw.

2. The occasion for that application was an absence of present instructions from Mr Foster to appear.  Further, as I understood the submission made in relation to the application for leave to withdraw, there was a degree of professional embarrassment occasioned in that regard.

3. The application is not one opposed by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission.

4. Mr Burrow confirmed that Mr Foster was aware of today’s proceedings.  He has chosen not to appear in his own right.  Nor has he furnished his solicitors with an alternative address for service to communicate to the Court.

5. Prior to disposing of the withdrawal application, I put to Mr Burrow the proposition that, as presently advised, it seemed to me that it was possible for the court to proceed to deal with the question of penalty in respect of contempt in the absence of the defendant respondent.  Mr Burrow confirmed that this was his understanding of the position, it being a matter for the discretion of the court as to whether so to proceed.  That particular position in law was one in which he informed had been taken into account in nonetheless making the application for leave to withdraw.

6. In the circumstances prevailing, my view is that the solicitors for Mr Foster ought be granted leave to withdraw.  I make an order accordingly.

I certify that the preceding six (6) numbered paragraph is a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Logan.

Associate:

Dated:       29 October 2013