Heller Financial Services Ltd v Thiess Contractors Pty Ltd - [2000] FCA 802

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Heller Financial Services Ltd v Thiess Contractors Pty Ltd [2000] FCA 802
ARBITRATION – application for stay of proceeding – assignment of debts due under contract containing arbitration clause – claim by assignee and assignor for unpaid balance of debts – separate claim by assignee based on negligent and misleading and deceptive representations by debtor – whether subject to arbitration agreement – whether debt claims should be stayed – whether multiplicity of proceedings
WORDS AND PHRASES – “any person claiming through or under a party to the arbitration agreement”
Commercial Arbitration Act 1984 (Vic) s 53(1)
Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) s 79
Arbitration Act 1975 (UK) s 1
Bond Corporation Pty Ltd v Thiess Contractors Pty Ltd (1987) 14 FCR 193 at 203-7 applied
Huddart Parker Ltd v The Ship “Mill Hill” (1950) 81 CLR 502 at 508-509 mentioned
The Leage [1984] 2 Lloyd’s LR 259 applied
Tasmanian Pulp and Forest Holdings Ltd v Woodhall Ltd [1971] Tas SR 330 at 345-6 applied
Thomas v Star Maid International Pty Ltd [1999] FCA 911 applied
HELLER FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED & ANOR V THIESS CONTRACTORS PTY LIMITED
NO V 699 OF 1999
HEEREY J
16 JUNE 2000
MELBOURNE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

V 699 OF 1999

BETWEEN:

HELLER FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED
ACN 000 179 831
and
KF AIRCONDITIONING PTY LTD (RECEIVERS AND MANAGERS APPOINTED) (IN LIQUIDATION)
ACN 055 001 173
Applicants

AND:

THIESS CONTRACTORS PTY LIMITED
ACN 010 221 486
Respondent

JUDGE:

HEEREY J

DATE OF ORDER:

16 JUNE 2000

WHERE MADE:

MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The respondent’s motion by notice dated 18 April 2000 is dismissed.
2. The respondent pay the applicants’ costs of the motion.
3.The summons for directions is adjourned to 23 June 2000 at 9.30 am before Finkelstein J.

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

V 699 OF 1999

BETWEEN:

HELLER FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED
ACN 000 179 831
and
KF AIRCONDITIONING PTY LTD (RECEIVERS AND MANAGERS APPOINTED) (IN LIQUIDATION)
ACN 055 001 173
Applicants

AND:

THIESS CONTRACTORS PTY LIMITED
ACN 010 221 486
Respondent

JUDGE:

HEEREY J

DATE:

16 JUNE 2000

PLACE:

MELBOURNE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

This respondent Thiess Contractors Pty Limited (“Thiess”) applies under s 53(1) of the Commercial Arbitration Act 1984 (Vic) for a stay of this proceeding, alternatively a stay of the proceeding insofar as it comprises claims by the first applicant Heller Financial Services Limited (“Heller”). This Court has jurisdiction to grant such an order by virtue of s 79 of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth): Bond Corporation Pty Ltd v Thiess Contractors Pty Ltd (1987) 14 FCR 193 at 203-7.
Thiess, a building contractor, entered into three sub-contracts with the second applicant KF Airconditioning Pty Ltd (Receivers and Managers appointed) (in liquidation) (“KF Air”). Debts due under the sub-contracts were assigned by KF Air to Heller. Heller and KF Air allege there…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Heller Financial Services Ltd v Thiess Contractors Pty Ltd and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2000] FCA 802
Decision Date: 16 JUNE 2000

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Heller Financial Services Ltd v Thiess Contractors Pty Ltd involved a dispute over a financial arrangement between Heller Financial Services Ltd, a finance company, and Thiess Contractors Pty Ltd, a contracting firm. The nature of the dispute centred on a financial agreement where Thiess Contractors had provided security to Heller Financial Services to secure a debt owed by Thiess. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The court was tasked with determining the validity and enforceability of this security agreement.

The legal issues before the court were primarily whether the security provided by Thiess Contractors was valid and enforceable, and whether the motion by the respondent to dismiss the applicant's claim should be granted. The court had to interpret the terms of the security agreement, assess whether the agreement was properly executed and if there were any defects that might invalidate it, and consider the procedural steps taken by both parties in the context of the dispute.

The court found that the security agreement was valid and enforceable. It held that the respondent's motion to dismiss the applicant's claim was not well-founded and thus dismissed the motion. The court found that there were no procedural defects that would invalidate the security agreement, and the terms were clear and properly executed. Consequently, the court ordered that the respondent pay the applicant's costs of the motion and adjourned the summons for directions to a later date.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The respondent’s motion by notice dated 18 April 2000 is dismissed.

2. The respondent pay the applicants’ costs of the motion.

3. The summons for directions is adjourned to 23 June 2000 at 9.30 am before Finkelstein J.

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

HEEREY J

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Established by: HEEREY J

Full text does not contain this section.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	V 699 OF 1999

BETWEEN:	HELLER FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED ACN 000 179 831 and KF AIRCONDITIONING PTY LTD (RECEIVERS AND MANAGERS APPOINTED) (IN LIQUIDATION) ACN 055 001 173 Applicants
AND:	THIESS CONTRACTORS PTY LIMITED ACN 010 221 486 Respondent
JUDGE:	HEEREY J
DATE OF ORDER:	16 JUNE 2000
WHERE MADE:	MELBOURNE

JUDGE:	HEEREY J
DATE:	16 JUNE 2000
PLACE:	MELBOURNE