Instant Rewards Pty Ltd v Baker Motors Pty Ltd

In the matter of Instant Rewards Pty Ltd v Baker Motors Pty Ltd, the dispute arose from a contract for advertising services between the two companies. The plaintiff sought a mandatory injunction to compel the defendant to perform the contract by providing free services to the public. The case was heard by the Federal Court of Australia.

The legal issues before the court included whether the plaintiff was entitled to a mandatory injunction and whether the court should exercise its discretion to grant such an injunction. The court had to weigh the equities between the parties, considering factors such as the strength of the plaintiff's case, the likelihood of the defendant succeeding on its defence, and the balance of convenience. The court also considered whether granting a mandatory injunction would result in the defendant obtaining the whole of the relief sought before the trial.

The court found that the defendant had a strong prima facie case that the contract was procured by misleading and deceptive conduct. The court concluded that it was not appropriate to exercise its discretion to grant a mandatory injunction, as doing so would result in the defendant obtaining the whole of the relief sought before the trial. The court also found that the balance of convenience favoured the defendant, as the grant of a mandatory injunction would cause significant hardship to the defendant and its customers. Therefore, the court dismissed the plaintiff's application for a mandatory injunction.

No further orders were made by the court. The case will proceed to trial on the defendant's defence of misleading and deceptive conduct.