Del Casale & Ors. v Artedomus (Aust) Pty. Limited (No.2)

In *Del Casale & Ors. v Artedomus (Aust) Pty. Limited (No.2)*, the appellants sought to appeal orders made by the trial judge on 12 April 2006. The dispute concerned alleged contravention of a non-compete clause in an agreement.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the trial judge had erred in their original orders, particularly in relation to the declarations made concerning the first defendant's conduct and the subsequent orders for damages and costs. The court was also required to consider the appropriate allocation of costs between parties who shared legal representation.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, setting aside the trial judge's orders. The court declared that the first defendant had contravened clause 7 of the agreement by arranging and effecting the importation of Pietra di Modica, thereby competing with the plaintiff. The plaintiff was granted an entitlement to an enquiry as to damages against the first defendant, with the costs of that enquiry to abide its outcome. The proceedings were otherwise dismissed. In relation to costs, the court ordered that the plaintiff pay one-half of the defendants' costs (for the benefit of the second and third defendants) and that the first defendant pay two-thirds of the plaintiff's costs. The respondent was ordered to pay one-half of the appellants' costs of the appeal (for the benefit of the second and third appellants) and a further one-quarter of the appellants' costs of the appeal (for the benefit of the first appellant).