Chen v Protel Communications International Pty Ltd

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Chen v Protel Communications International Pty Ltd [2007] FCA 1374

YOUFA CHEN v PROTEL COMMUNICATIONS INTERNATIONAL PTY LTD
VID 689 OF 2007

YOUFA CHEN V SAISE PTY LTD
VID 690 OF 2007

JESSUP J
31 AUGUST 2007
MELBOURNE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	VID 689 OF 2007

BETWEEN:	YOUFA CHEN Applicant
AND:	PROTEL COMMUNICATIONS INTERNATIONAL PTY LTD Respondent
JUDGE:	JESSUP J
DATE OF ORDER:	31 AUGUST 2007
WHERE MADE:	MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The application for leave to appeal be dismissed.

2.Pending argument on behalf of the parties, costs be reserved. 

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	VID 690 OF 2007

BETWEEN:	YOUFA CHEN Applicant
AND:	SAISE PTY LTD  Respondent

JUDGE:	JESSUP J
DATE OF ORDER:	3 SEPTEMBER 2007
WHERE MADE:	MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The application for leave to appeal be dismissed.

2.Pending argument on behalf of the parties, costs be reserved. 

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	VID 689 OF 2007 VID 690 OF 2007

BETWEEN:

YOUFA CHEN
Applicant

AND:

AND BETWEEN:

AND

PROTEL COMMUNICATIONS INTERNATIONAL PTY LTD
Respondent

YOUFA CHEN
Applicant

SAISE PTY LTD
Respondent

JUDGE:	JESSUP J
DATE:	31 AUGUST 2007
PLACE:	MELBOURNE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. Before the court are two applications for leave to appeal from interlocutory orders made by the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia on 17 July 2007.  The orders were made in two proceedings in that court, in each of which the present applicant is the first respondent, and a company with which he is associated, Newtech Australia Pty Ltd (“Newtech”), is the second respondent.  One proceeding is brought by Saise Pty Ltd and the other proceeding is brought by Protel Communications International Pty Ltd.  They are the respondents to the present applications for leave to appeal.  The two proceedings below are highly similar, if not substantially identical, and no need to distinguish between them presently arises.

2. The nature of the interlocutory issues before the Federal Magistrate appears clearly from his Honour’s comprehensive reasons for judgment published on 17 July 2007: Protel Communications International Pty Ltd v Chen [2007] FMCA 1135. The applicant is facing trial on indictment in the District Court of Queensland on six counts of dishonestly obtaining telecommunications services. In the Federal Magistrates Court proceedings, the applicant and Newtech are sued for damages and other remedies for contraventions of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), the Fair Trading Act 1999 (Vic) and the Fair Trading Act 1989 (Qld). According to the reasons of the Federal Magistrate, it seems that the proceedings are based upon the same transactions as are the subject of the indictment in the District Court.

3. In April 2007 (before the presentation of the indictment), the Federal Magistrate gave directions for the conduct of the proceedings…