Brand v Digi-Tech (Australia) Ltd - [2002] NSWSC 416

No judgment structure available for this case.

CITATION: Graham Leonard Brand & Ors v Digi-Tech (Australia ) Limited & Ors, Christopher Gerard Kelliher & Ors v Digi-Tech (Australia) Limited & Ors [2002] NSWSC 416

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 50169/99; 50087/00

HEARING DATE(S): 6/5/02, 7/5/02, 8/5/02, 9/5/02, 10/5/02. 13/5/02, 14/5/02, 15/5/02, 16/5/02, 17/5/02, 20/5/02, 21/5/02, 22/5/02, 23/5/02, 24/5/02, 27/5/02, 28/5/02, 29/5/02, 30/5/02, 31/5/02, 3/6/02, 4/6/02, 11/6/02, 12/6/02, 13,6/02, 14/6/02

JUDGMENT DATE: 13 August 2002

PARTIES :

Graham Leonard Brand & Ors (Plaintiffs)
Christopher Gerard Kelliher & Ors (Plaintiffs)
Dig-Tech (Australia) Limited (1st Defendant)
Digi-Tech Equities Limited (2nd Defendant)
Digi-Tech Communications (3rd Defendant)
John Anthony Reid (4th Defendant)

JUDGMENT OF: Einstein J

COUNSEL : Mr A J Meagher SC, Mr I M Jackman (Plaintiffs)
Mr J C Sheahan SC, Mr M Christie (Defendants)

SOLICITORS: Atanaskovic Hartnell (Plaintiffs)
Blake Dawson Waldron (Defendants)

CATCHWORDS: Trade Practices - Misleading and deceptive conduct - Section 52 Trade Practices Act 1974 - Section 51A Trade Practices Act 1974 - Contract - Construction of contract - Termination for breach of contract - Materiality of breaches - Repudiation - Validity of exercise of options - Abandonment - [see more detailed catchwords within]

LEGISLATION CITED: Copyright Act 1968
Corporations Law
Dividends, Interest and Royalties Withholding Tax) Act 1974 (Cwlth)
Fair Trading Act 1986 (NZ)
Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (Cwlth)
Income Tax Assessment Regulations
International Tax Agreements Act 1953 (Cth)
Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cwth)

DECISION: The plaintiffs have failed in their misleading and deceptive conduct cases.; The Kalifair Pty Ltd and Kalinick Pty Ltd option agreements never had any contractual effect so that there were no options capable of being exercised; The defendants have failed in their claims to have terminated the subject agreements.; Save in the case of the McLean Tecnic companies, the remaining plaintiffs with valid option agreements have succeeded in their claims to have exercised the options.; Disparate issues are considered against the event that certain holdings be incorrect.; Short minutes of order to be brought in

Last Modified: 09/11/2002

Actions

Download as PDF Download as Word Document

Citations

Graham Leonard Brand and Ors v Digi-Tech (Australia ) Limited and Ors, Christopher Gerard Kelliher and Ors v Digi-Tech (Australia) Limited and Ors [2002] NSWSC 416

Most Recent Citation

Payton Securities Pty Ltd v Mason White McDougall (Hurstbridge) Pty Ltd [2021] VSC 375

Cases Citing This Decision

8

SSABR Pty Ltd v AMA Group Ltd (No 3) [2024] NSWSC 1415

Halkett v APG & Co Pty Ltd [2023] NSWSC 1058

Flynn v PPK Mining Equipment Pty Ltd (No 2) [2022] NSWSC 1640

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

8

CITATION:	Graham Leonard Brand & Ors v Digi-Tech (Australia ) Limited & Ors, Christopher Gerard Kelliher & Ors v Digi-Tech (Australia) Limited & Ors [2002] NSWSC 416
FILE NUMBER(S):	SC 50169/99; 50087/00
HEARING DATE(S):	6/5/02, 7/5/02, 8/5/02, 9/5/02, 10/5/02. 13/5/02, 14/5/02, 15/5/02, 16/5/02, 17/5/02, 20/5/02, 21/5/02, 22/5/02, 23/5/02, 24/5/02, 27/5/02, 28/5/02, 29/5/02, 30/5/02, 31/5/02, 3/6/02, 4/6/02, 11/6/02, 12/6/02, 13,6/02, 14/6/02
JUDGMENT DATE:	13 August 2002
PARTIES :	Graham Leonard Brand & Ors (Plaintiffs) Christopher Gerard Kelliher & Ors (Plaintiffs) Dig-Tech (Australia) Limited (1st Defendant) Digi-Tech Equities Limited (2nd Defendant) Digi-Tech Communications (3rd Defendant) John Anthony Reid (4th Defendant)
JUDGMENT OF:	Einstein J

COUNSEL :	Mr A J Meagher SC, Mr I M Jackman (Plaintiffs) Mr J C Sheahan SC, Mr M Christie (Defendants)
SOLICITORS:	Atanaskovic Hartnell (Plaintiffs) Blake Dawson Waldron (Defendants)
CATCHWORDS:	Trade Practices - Misleading and deceptive conduct - Section 52 Trade Practices Act 1974 - Section 51A Trade Practices Act 1974 - Contract - Construction of contract - Termination for breach of contract - Materiality of breaches - Repudiation - Validity of exercise of options - Abandonment - [see more detailed catchwords within]
LEGISLATION CITED:	Copyright Act 1968 Corporations Law Dividends, Interest and Royalties Withholding Tax) Act 1974 (Cwlth) Fair Trading Act 1986 (NZ) Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (Cwlth) Income Tax Assessment Regulations International Tax Agreements Act 1953 (Cth) Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cwth)
DECISION:	The plaintiffs have failed in their misleading and deceptive conduct cases.; The Kalifair Pty Ltd and Kalinick Pty Ltd option agreements never had any contractual effect so that there were no options capable of being exercised; The defendants have failed in their claims to have terminated the subject agreements.; Save in the case of the McLean Tecnic companies, the remaining plaintiffs with valid option agreements have succeeded in their claims to have exercised the options.; Disparate issues are considered against the event that certain holdings be incorrect.; Short minutes of order to be brought in