Fightvision v Tszyu - [2000] NSWSC 899

CITATION: Fightvision -v- Tszyu [2000] NSWSC 899

CURRENT JURISDICTION: Equity Division
Commercial List

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 50073/00

HEARING DATE(S): 28.8.00, 29.8.00

JUDGMENT DATE: 1 September 2000

PARTIES :

Fightvision Pty Ltd & William George Mordey -v- Konstantin Tszyu

JUDGMENT OF: Hunter J

COUNSEL : Plaintiffs: F S McAlary QC & A S Bell
Defedant: M R Aldridge SC & J J Fernon

SOLICITORS: Plaintiffs: Back Schwartz Vaughan
Defendant: Benjamin & Khoury

CATCHWORDS: Practice & procedure - anti-suit injunction - abuse of process in maintaining proceedings in Industrial Relations Commission - dominant purpose of Commission proceedings.

LEGISLATION CITED: Industrial Relations Act 1996 (NSW)

CASES CITED: Fightvision Pty Ltd -v- Onisforou [1999] 47 NSWLR 473
Fightvision Pty Ltd -v- Tszyu (Unreported, Supreme Court of New South Wales, Bainton J of 27 March 1998)
CSR Limited -v- Cigna Insurance Australia Ltd [1997] 189 CLR 345
A & M Thompson Pty Limited -v- Total Australia Limited [1980] 2 NSWLR 1
Walton -v- Gardiner [1992-1993] 177 CLR 378
Tszyu -v- Mordey (Unreported, Industrial Relations Commission of NSW, Marks J of 15 June 2000)
Williams -v- Spautz [1991-1992] 174 CLR 509

DECISION: Defendant enjoined from taking steps in Industrial Relations Commission proceedings other than to discontinue.

THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
EQUITY DIVISION
COMMERCIAL LIST

HUNTER J

FRIDAY 1 SEPTEMBER 2000
50063/00 FIGHTVISION PTY LIMITED & WILLIAM GEORGE MORDEY -v- KONSTANTIN TSZYU

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1 In these proceedings the plaintiffs, Fightvision Pty Limited (Fightvision) and William George Mordey (Mordey) move for an anti-suit injunction against Konstantin Tszyu (Tszyu) restraining him from further prosecuting proceedings (the Commission proceedings) instituted by him in the Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales (the Commission). The prosecution of those proceedings is asserted to constitute an abuse of process having regard to the conduct and outcome of litigation instituted in this Court (the Commercial Division proceedings) by Fightvision and Mordey (the promoters), inter alia, seeking an account of profits arising out of a boxing promotion agreement with Tszyu.
2 The plaintiffs in the Commercial Division proceedings relied on a contract between Classic Promotions Pty Limited of 17 January 1992, novated in favour of Fightvision (the fight promotion agreement), which was for a period of three years, with an option of renewal for a further two years and which the plaintiffs asserted had been exercised. During that contract period Tszyu had progressed from a career as a prominent amateur boxer to a boxer of world champion status. Tszyu denied the existence of any such agreement and as an alternative defence contended as follows:

"27 …the Court ought not to enforce any such agreement by reason of the unconscionable conduct of the Second Plaintiff and of Classic Promotions Pty Limited which conduct was adopted by Fightvision, or alternatively by reason of the unclean hands of each of the Plaintiffs, being as follows:

(a) During the course of discussions in January 1992 in relation to the CP Agreement, which was signed by the First Defendant on 17 January 1992, Classic Promotions…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Fightvision v Tszyu

Details

AGLC: Fightvision v Tszyu [2000] NSWSC 899
Case: [2000] NSWSC 899
Decision Date: 1 September 2000

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Fightvision and Tszyu were involved in a dispute that was brought before the court. The crux of the matter was whether the Industrial Relations Commission had jurisdiction to hear the case and if Tszyu had abused the process by maintaining proceedings in the Commission. Fightvision sought an anti-suit injunction to prevent Tszyu from proceeding with the Industrial Relations Commission case, arguing that it was an abuse of process given the dominant purpose of those proceedings.

The court had to determine if the Industrial Relations Commission's proceedings were an abuse of process and if the dominant purpose of those proceedings was not to resolve genuine industrial disputes but to circumvent the court's jurisdiction. Additionally, the court needed to decide whether Fightvision was entitled to an anti-suit injunction to prevent Tszyu from continuing with the proceedings in the Commission.

The court found that the dominant purpose of the Industrial Relations Commission proceedings was not to resolve genuine industrial disputes but to avoid the court's jurisdiction. Consequently, the court held that Tszyu had abused the process by maintaining the proceedings in the Commission. As a result, the court granted Fightvision an anti-suit injunction, preventing Tszyu from continuing with the proceedings in the Industrial Relations Commission. This decision ensured that the proper legal channels were followed and protected Fightvision's rights in the matter.

Orders