Baulderstone Hornibrook Pty Ltd (ACN 002 625 130) v Qantas Airways Ltd (ACN 009 661 901)

[2003] FCAFC 204

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Baulderstone Hornibrook Pty Ltd (ACN 002 625 130) v Qantas Airways Ltd (ACN 009 661 901) [2003] FCAFC 204

BAULDERSTONE HORNIBROOK PTY LTD (ACN 002 625 130) V QANTAS AIRWAYS LTD (ACN 009 661 901)
V 643 OF 1999

LEE, GOLDBERG & ALLSOP JJ
25 AUGUST 2003
MELBOURNE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	V 643 of 1999

ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	BAULDERSTONE HORNIBROOK PTY LTD ACN 002 625 130 APPLICANT
AND:	QANTAS AIRWAYS LTD ACN 009 661 901 RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	LEE, GOLDBERG & ALLSOP JJ
DATE OF ORDER:	25 AUGUST 2003
WHERE MADE:	MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The notice of motion of 22 April 2003 be dismissed.

2.The applicant pay the respondent’s costs of the notice of motion.

Note:   Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	V 643 of 1999

ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:	BAULDERSTONE HORNIBROOK PTY LTD ACN 002 625 130 APPLICANT
AND:	QANTAS AIRWAYS LTD ACN 009 661 901 RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	LEE, GOLDBERG & ALLSOP JJ
DATE:	25 AUGUST 2003
PLACE:	MELBOURNE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

THE COURT:

1. The court is not satisfied that the administration of justice is best served by permitting the applicant at this stage to ventilate its complaints about the orders and reasons of the primary judge made and published on 11 March 2003.  There are various possible future outcomes in the disposition of all the matters within the controversy.  We are unconvinced that allowing an appeal at this point would be likely to lessen, in the long run, the burden of the litigation for the parties and the Court. 

2. We are grateful for the helpful and comprehensive submissions provided and made to the Court.  From them we are not persuaded that there is displayed in the reasons of the primary judge any manifest error which warrants the interruption to the completion of the case at first instance. 

3. Overall, we are of the view that allowing an appeal at this point may, in all the circumstances, compound any procedural or other difficulties which may presently inhere in the matter, if the applicant be correct in respect of at least some of its arguments. 

4. Overall, in our view the parties should be left to finish the matter at first instance with the light that has been shone on the issues by the submissions in this application before bringing any appeals from a mature and complete resolution of issues at first instance. 

5. For these reasons the notice of motion of 22 April 2003 should be dismissed with costs.

I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justices Lee, Goldberg & Allsop.

Associate:

Dated:            5 September 2003

Counsel for the Applicant:

Mr A J Myers QC and Mr P R Hayes QC

with Mr C W R Harrison

Solicitor for the Applicant:

Gadens

Counsel for the Respondent:

Mr A C Archibald QC with Dr D F Kinder

Solicitor for the Respondent:

Blake Dawson Waldron

Date of Hearing:

25 August 2003

Date of Judgment:

25 August 2003