EXPECTATION PTY LTD -v- PINNACLE VRB LIMITED [2004] WASCA 261
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2004] WASCA 261 | |
| THE FULL COURT (WA) | |||
| Case No: | FUL:142/2003 | 11 AUGUST 2004 | |
| Coram: | STEYTLER J MCKECHNIE J JENKINS J | 16/11/04 | |
| 38 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Appeal dismissed | ||
| B | |||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | EXPECTATION PTY LTD (ACN 009 030 102) PINNACLE VRB LIMITED (ACN 060 111 784) |
Catchwords: | Contract Breach Condition precedent to an agreement required parties to enter into formal licence agreements and a collaborative venture Clause required parties to negotiate those agreements in good faith Alleged breach of that clause Whether trial Judge erred in finding respondent had not breached term requiring parties to negotiate in good faith Whether trial Judge erred by finding appellant breached term requiring parties to negotiate in good faith when that finding was not open on the pleadings or on the way the case was run at trial Turns on own facts |
Legislation: | Nil |
Case References: | Anaconda Nickel Ltd v Tarmoola Australia Pty Ltd (2000) 22 WAR 101 Booker Industries Pty Ltd v Wilson Parking (Qld) Pty Ltd (1982) 149 CLR 600 Expectation Pty Ltd v Pinnacle VRB Ltd [2001] WASC 144 Expectation Pty Ltd v Pinnacle VRB Ltd [2002] WASCA 160 Aiton Australia Pty Ltd v Transfield Pty Ltd (1999) 153 FLR 236 Automasters Australia Pty Ltd v Bruness Pty Ltd (2003) Aust Contract Reports 90162 Boyes v Colins (2000) 23 WAR 123 Central Exchange Ltd v Anaconda Nickel Ltd (2002) 26 WAR 33 Coal Cliff Collieries Pty Ltd v Sijehama Pty Ltd (1991) 24 NSWLR 1 Cohen v BBA Mortgage Corporation Pty Ltd, unreported; SCt of WA; Library No 980114; 17 March 1998 Commercial Union Assurance Company of Australia Ltd v Ferrcom Pty Ltd (1991) 22 NSWLR 389 Cordelia Holdings Pty Ltd v Newkey Investments Pty Ltd [2002] FCA 1018 Cordelia Holdings Pty Ltd v Newkey Investments Pty Ltd [2004] FCAFC 48 Foran v Wright (1989) 168 CLR 385 Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118 Glover v Australian Ultra Concrete Floors Pty Ltd [2003] NSWCA 80 Khan v Armaguard Ltd [1994] 1 WLR 1204 Mahoney v Lindsay (1980) 55 ALJR 118 Paltara Pty Ltd v Dempster (1991) 6 WAR 85 Payless Superbarn (NSW) Pty Ltd v O'Gara (1990) 19 NSWLR 551 Peter Turnbull & Co Pty Ltd v Mundus Trading Co (Australasia) Pty Ltd (1954) 90 CLR 235 R v GEC (2001) 3 VR 334 Rooty Hill Medical Centre Pty Ltd v Gunther [2002] NSWCA 60 Smith v Advanced Electrics Pty Ltd [2003] QCA 432 Smith v Carbone Bros Pty Ltd, unreported; FCt SCt of WA; Library No 960369; 17 July 1996 Southwell v Tomomoto (1992) 109 FLR 12 State Rail Authority of New South Wales v Earthline Constructions Pty Ltd (In Liq) (1999) 73 ALJR 306 Thiess Contractors Pty Ltd v Placer (Granny Smith) Pty Ltd (2000) 16 BCL 255 Walton Stores (Interstate) Ltd v Maher (1988) 164 CLR 387 White v Overland… |
Continue reading Expectation Pty Ltd v Pinnacle VRB Ltd
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- Expectation Pty Ltd v Pinnacle VRB Ltd [2004] WASCA 261
- Case
- [2004] WASCA 261
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of Expectation Pty Ltd v Pinnacle VRB Ltd involved a dispute between two companies regarding the interpretation and application of contractual terms related to a condition precedent. The trial court found that Pinnacle VRB Ltd had not breached the term requiring the parties to negotiate in good faith, whereas Expectation Pty Ltd was found to have breached the same term. Expectation Pty Ltd appealed the decision of the trial court, arguing that the court had erred in its findings.
The primary legal issues the court had to address were whether the trial court was correct in finding that Pinnacle VRB Ltd had not breached the term requiring parties to negotiate in good faith, and whether the trial court erred in finding that Expectation Pty Ltd had breached the same term. The court also had to consider if the findings were open based on the pleadings or the way the case was run at trial.
The court, in dismissing the appeal, found that the trial judge's reasoning was sound and that the findings were consistent with the evidence presented. The court held that the trial judge's conclusion that Pinnacle VRB Ltd had not breached the term was supported by the evidence, and that the finding regarding Expectation Pty Ltd was also justified. The appeal was dismissed as there were no grounds to overturn the trial judge's decision.
The primary legal issues the court had to address were whether the trial court was correct in finding that Pinnacle VRB Ltd had not breached the term requiring parties to negotiate in good faith, and whether the trial court erred in finding that Expectation Pty Ltd had breached the same term. The court also had to consider if the findings were open based on the pleadings or the way the case was run at trial.
The court, in dismissing the appeal, found that the trial judge's reasoning was sound and that the findings were consistent with the evidence presented. The court held that the trial judge's conclusion that Pinnacle VRB Ltd had not breached the term was supported by the evidence, and that the finding regarding Expectation Pty Ltd was also justified. The appeal was dismissed as there were no grounds to overturn the trial judge's decision.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appeal dismissed
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.