Moss, G.C. v Bergood Pty Ltd

[1987] FCA 126

-ACTICE PR AND PROCEDURE - alleged misrepresentation, fraud and

-

breach of contract - contract to purchase brick-making machine

respondent's application to transfer proceedings Erom Perth to formed in Sydney broken in Western Australia - balance of convenience equal - need to demonstrate a manlfest balance of inconvenience to justify transfer.

Trade Practices Act 1974 s.52 s.53C

Sale of Goods Act 1983 s.14(1)

Hodder v Australlan Workers Union (1984) 4 FCR 541

GERALD CAREW MOSS

V BERGOOD PTY LTD

NO. WAG 106 Of 1986

FRENCH J.

19 FEBRUARY 1987

PERTH

i --.

- _

4

I N THE FEDERAL COURT

OF AUSTRALIA )

WESTERN AUST D I S T R I C T ALIA )

R E G I S R Y )

G F N E R A L D I V I S I O N ) NO. WAG 106 of 1 9 8 6

B E T W E E N : GERALD CAREW MOSS

Applicant

a n d

BERGOOD PTY LTI?

R e s p o n d e n t

MINUTE OF ORDER

JUDGE MAKING ORDER: FRENCH J .

DATE OF ORDER: 19 Februa ry 1987

WHERE MADE: PERTH

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The m o t i o n is d i s m i s s e d .

2 . R e s p o n d e n t t o pay App l i can t ' s costs of the motlon.

Note: Se t t lement a n d e n t r y of orders is d e a l t

w l t h I n O r d e r 36 of t h e F e d e r a l C o u r t R u l e s .

CORAM :	FRFEICA J.
19 FEPDUARY 1987

EX TEMPOPT: RFASOKS FOF JUDGilENT

This appllcatlon was lnstltutcd on 3 0 October 1986 ln

the Western F.ustrallan Cistrict Peqlstry. Ay it, the applicant

claims damages against the respondent €or contraventlons of	s s . 5 2
and 5 3 C oE the Trade Practices Act 1974.

T h e contraventlons aris said from t are

representatlons made I?y the respondent to the appllcant lr:

connectlon wlth the sale to the appllcant of	a TDEI-6	diesel
trailer-mounted brlck-maker.

The applicant also alleges fraud and breach of contract on the part of the respondent and clalns damages whlch,	I am
informed by counsel, v111 be in the vlclnlty of $40,000.

3

T h e r e s n o n r l e n t m o v e s t h e cou r t f o r a n o r d e r t h a t t h e

p r o c e e d l n g s s h o u l d be t r a n s f e r r e d t o t h c F e d e r a l C o u r t o f

A u s t r a l i a , S y d n e y Z e g l r t r y .

T h e s L a t c n c n t of c l a l n f l l e d l n these n r o c c e d l n g s

~ n d l c a t e s t h a t the r e s p o n c j c n t 1s and was a t a l l m a t e r l a l times a

c o m p a n y l n c o r p o r a t e d 1 n Kew S o u t h !*:ales a n d c a r r y i n g o n t h e

b u s i n e s s of t h e m a n u f a c t u r e , s a l e and s u p p l y of g o o d s , n a m e l y t h e

S r l c k - i ~ a k e r ~n question. C w r i t t ? n a g r e e n w n t w a s s a l d t o h a v e

b e e n e n t e r e d I n t o bctween t h c e p p l l c a n t a n d t h e r e s 3 o n d e n t wlth B

v i e w t o t h e supply o f t h e b r l c k - m a k e r t o t h e applicant €or a t o t a l

p u r c h a s e p r l c e of $ 3 1 , 6 0 0 .

V a r l o u s r e p r c s e n t a t l o n s were s a l d t o have been made by

t h e r e s p o n d e n t p r l o r t o t h e f o r m a t l o n of t h e a g r e e m e n t i n r e l a t i o n

t o t h e p e r f o r m a n c e c h a r a c t e r l s t l c s o f t h e b r l c k - m a k e r , a n d i n

p a r t i c u l a r i t s p r o d u c t l o n r a t e . T h o s c r e p r e s e n t a t l o n s a r e s a i d t o

h a v e c o n s t l t u t e d c o n d u c t w h i c h i s m l s l e a d i n g a n d d e c e p t i v e z n

t r a d e	a n d	commerce	1 n c o n t r a v e n t l o n	of	s . 5 2	o f	t h e	T r a d e	Prac t lces
-	Act.

A l t e r n a t i v e l y , t h e y a r e s a l d t o have been made

f r a u d u l e n t l y .

4 l t e r n a t l v e l y l t 1s a l l e g e d t h a t h e r e was a n implied

c o n d l t l o n of t h e c o n t r a c t of sale t h a t h e b r i c k - m a k e r s h o u l d b e

of m e r c h a n t a b l e q u a l l t y p u r s u a n t t o S.] 4 ( 2 ) of t h e S a l e of Goods

3.

1935 a n d t h a t i t s h o u l e b e r e a s o n a b l y s u l t < - , h l e f o r n a k i n q

br icks uneer the c o n d i t i o n s oC i t s operation p u r s u a n t t o s .14(1)

o f t h a t Act.

I n a n a f _ f i r l a v l t f i l e r ! l n s u p p o r t of l t s a ? p l i c z t l o n t o

h a v e the m a t t e r t r a n s f c r r e d t o t h e S y d p e y R e g i s t r y , the r e s p o n d e n t

by I t s s o l i c i t o r , says t h a t all r e l e v a n t wi tnesses Cor i t s c a s e

a r e p r e s e n t 1 n S y e n e y , l n c l u d i n q e x p e r t s who a r e f a m i l i a r w l t h t h e

c o n s t r u c t i o n a n d m a n u f a c t u r c c: t h e b r i c k - q a k e r .

I n p a r t i c u l a r i t 1s s a l d , t h a t Mr R e r n a r d M a r r l a q e , who

w a s s u b c o n t r a c t e d t o d e s i g n t h e b r l c k - m a k e r a n d b u i l d i t s c h a s s l s

a n d c y l i n d e r s , w o u l d b e a v a i l a b l e i n Sydney t o g l v e v i d e n c e o n

t h e a l l e g a t i o n b y t h e applicant t h a t i t was u n f i t €or i t s p u r p o s e

a n d was of u n m e r c h a n t a b l e q u a l i t y .

The b r i c k - m a k e r 1 s s i t u a t e d i n S y d n e y , h a v i n g b e e n

r e t u r n e d t he re b y t h e a p p l l c a n t ' s f i n a n c i e r who took p o s s e s s i o n of

t h e m a c h i n e . I t i s s t o r e d w i t h a c o m p a n y c a l l e d P a s o n P t y

L i m i t e d , w h i c h b o u g h t f r o n r e s p o n d e n t t h e t h e r l g h t s t o

m a n u f a c t u r e	t h e	b r i c k - m a k e r .
I t	1s f u r t h e r v o l n t e d o u t , t h a t t h e c o n t r a c t t o p u r c h a s e

t h e b r i c k - m a k e r w a s f o r m e d i n S y d n e y , b e i n g t h e p l a c e a t w h i c h t h e

a p p l i c a n t ' s o f f e r t o p u r c h a s e w a s a c c e p t e d a n d t h a t p r i o r t o t h e

d a t e o f c o n t r a c t , t h e a p p l i c a n t h a d a t t e n d e d a t t h e r e s p o n d e n t ' s

f a c t o r y a t H a r b o r d I n S y d n e y f o r a d e m o n s t r a t l o n .

I am t o l d b y Hr D o h e r t y , counsel for t h e a p p l l c a n t , t h a t

i t 1s a n t i c i p a t e d t h a t t h e r e v m u l d b e a t l e a s t two w ~ t n e s s c s

c a l l e d f o r the z ~ p l ~ c a n t b o t h o f whom r e s i d e 1 n S y d n e y . T h e

a l f l d a v l t c o n t e n A s ? I - a t t h e cos t a n d I n c o n v e n i e n c e ta t h e

r e s p o n d e n t i n c o n t l n u l n g t h e p r o c e e d l n ~ s i n P e r t h g r e a t l y

outweighs t h c d l s a d v a n t a g e t o t h e a p v l l c a n t , l f a n y , s h o u l d t h c

p r o c e e d i n q s h e t r a n s f e r r e d CO S y d n e y .

I n a n answering a f E l d a v l t , a s o l i c l t o r e m p l o y e d by t h e

s o l i c l t o r s f o r t h e a p p l l c a n t , savs t h a t a l l r e l e v a n t wltnesse5 f o r

t h e a p p l l c a n t a r e p r e s e n t l y l n P e r t h , including e n g i n e e r i n g

e x p e r t s who h a v e p r e p a r e d a r e p o r t a n a l y s i n q t h e p e r f o r m a n c e o f

t h e b r i c k - m a k i n g m a c h l n e t o e s t a b l i s h i t s p r o d u c t i o n c a p a b i l i t i e s .

T h e r e 1s a l s o r e s i d e n t i n P e r t h a bricklayer who p l a c e d a l a r g e

o r d e r w l t h t h e a p p l i c a n t , so i t is s a l d , f o r t h e s u p p l y o f b r i c k s

w h i c h was s u b s e q u e n t l y c a n c e l l e d when t h e a p p l i c a n t was u n a b l e t o

d e l l y e r w i t h i n the s p e c i f l e d p e r i o d .

Two o t h e r p e r s o n s , a Vr Bas ten w h o r e g u l a r l y a s s l s t e d

t h e a p p l l c a n t i n t h e o p e r a t l o n o f t h e b r i c k - n a k e r a n d a Mr Keefe

who c o n s t r u c t e d m o d l f l c a t l o n s t o t h e r n a c h l n e l n a n a t t e m p t t o

lncreasc l t s c a p a c i t y , a r e a l s o l o c a t e d i n P e r t h .

I t 1s c o n t e n d e d f u r t h e r l n t h e a f f i d a v l t t h a t t h e

c o n t r a c t t o p u r c h a s c t h e h r l c k - m a k e r w a s b r o k e n I n Western

Australia i n t h a t i t E a i l e d t o p e r f o r m l n a c c o r d a n c e w l t h t h e

r e p r e s e n t a t l o n s of t h e r e s p o n d e n t when o p e r a t e d I n t h l s S t a t e .

r

I t will e v i d e n t l y Se u n n e c e s s a r y f r c m t h e a p p l i c a p t ' s

p o i n t of v i e ~ r t o h a v e t h c nach lne tcste:l i n Piestern Australia a s

i t was so t e s t e d by i n d e p e n d e n t e n q i n p e r s a b o u t f o u r n o n t h s a f t e r

purchase.

T b e a p p l l c e n t , who r e s i d e s i n P e r t h , 1s s a i d a s a r e s u l t

oE t h e allesec? [ a l l u r e i n p e r f o r m a n c e o f t h e b r i c k - m a k e r , t o have

b e e n r e z u c e d t o impecunious c i r c u m s t a n c c s a n d w o u l d f l n c ! i t a

S u r d c n t o a t t e n d c o u r t i n Mew S o u t h \:ales w i t h h l s witnesses. T h e

c o s t s a n d i n c o n v e n i e n c e t o t h e a p p l i c a n t i n v o l v e d l n r e m l t t i n q t h e

a c t i o n t o t h e S y d n e y R e g i s t r y a r e t h e r e f o r e s a i d t o g r e a t l y

outweigh t h e d i s a d v a n t a g e , i f a n y , t o t h e r e s p o n d e n t .

T h e f a c t s d i s c l o s e , a s i n d i c a t e d o n t h e two a f f i d a v i t s ,

i n c o n v e n i e n c e a r i s i n g t o b o t h p a r t i e s i n t h e e v e n t t h a t t h e

a p p l i c a t i o n p r o c e e d s t o h e a r i n g I n a f o r u m o t h e r t h a n t h a t desired

b y t h e p a r t i e s r e s p e c t i v e l y .

P l a l n l y e n o u g h , i f t h e a p p l i c a t i o n p r o c e e d s i n P e r t h ,

t h e r e s p o n d e n t w i l l be d i s a d v a n t a g e d . I t s w i t n e s s e s a re b a s e d i n

S y d n e y , l t h a s i n s t r u c t e d c o u n s e l i n S y d n e y , a l t h o u g h t h a t is a

m a t t e r of c h o i c e , a n d i t w o u l d b e n e c e s s a r y for i t t o b r l n g t h e s e

p e o p l e t o P e r t h w i t h a l l t h e a t t e n d a n t e x p e n s e i n v o l v e d . On t h e

o t h e r h a n d , t h e a c t i o n is t r a n s f e r r e d t o S y d n e y , i t 1s p l a i n

t h a t t h e r e w i l l also b e s u b s t a n t i a l i n c o n v e n i e n c e s u f f e r e d b y t h e

a p p l i c a n t .

6 .

1:hlle i t 1s difficult ~n t h e s e c ~ r c u m s t a n c e s t o e n t e r

i n t o any r c a l i s t l c s s s e s s n e n t of the comparative wclqht o f the

inconvenience to be su:fercd by e i t h e r p a r t y , l t seems t o me on

t h e m a t e r l n l s p r e s p n t l y b e f o r e me that the balance of convcniencc,

I € any th ing , r a thc r t ends t o f avour t hc applicant.

However, even a?sumlnr: that the balance of convcnience

or lnconvenience 1s equa l a s be tween t he pa r t i e s , t he r e l evan t and

accep t?? p r inc l ? l e s co \ ’ e rn lng npo l l ca t lons f o r cbanqe of vPnue i n

s u c h c i r c u m s t a n c e s w o u l d m l l i t a t e a g a i n s t my a c c e d i n g t o t h e

r e s p o n d e n t ’ s m o t i o n i n t h i s c a s e . I will a d o p t t h e q e n e r a l

p r i n c i p l e e n u n c i a t e d i n Hodder v Australian Workers Union ( 1 3 8 4 )

A FCR a t 5 4 1 and a c c e p t t h a t i t 1s neceqsary, i n o r d e r t o J u s t i f y

a change of venue, that here should be demonstrated a rnanlfest

balance of convenience i n favour of the change, and that the Court

should not l i g h t l y a c c e d e t o a l t e r i n g t h e forum of choice of t h e

a p p l i c a n t , g i v e n O E course t h a t the choice 1s n e i t h e r a r b i t r a r y

n o r c a p r i c i o u s , and c e r t a i n l y t h a t c a n n o t be s a i d of the choice of

forum i n t h l s p a r t i c u l a r c a s e .

T h e r e f o r e , a c c e p t i n g a s I d o t h a t t h e r e w i l l be some

inconvenience to the respondent i n the mat ter proceer l lng l n t he

P e r t h r e g i s t r y , I w i l l n eve r the l e s s d l s m l s s on t h e b a s l s of t h e

accepted pr inc ip les , the mot ion for change of venue . I n doing so,

of cour sc , J do not d i s m i s s the possibility that the lnconvenlence

may be mi t iga t ed by s t e p s , l f i t should necessary be and

economlca l t o do so , t o be t aken t o t ake some of the cvldence i n

7 .

t h e c a s e i n ?;ew S o u t h ' . 'ales, b u t t h a t 1 s a m a t t e r t h a t c a n be

d E a l t w i t h whcn t h e a c t i o n 1s f u r t h e r p r o q r e s s e d a n d t h e p a r t i c s

a r e I n a p o s l t i o n t o know p r e c i s e l y I r h l c h w l t n c s s e s t h e y w o u l d

w i s p t o c a l l anr? w h t m a t t e r s a r f z r o p c r l y i n issue between tt,en.

?ly crcler will S c t h a t t h e motion i s d i s n l s s e d .

I c e r t i f y t h a t t h l s and t h e p r e c c e i n g

s 1 x ( G ) p a q c s a r c a t r u e copy of t b c

R e a s o n s f o r J u d g m e n t h e r e i n o f h i s

Honour ?lr Just ice F r e n c h . , ,

C o u n s e l

. for t h e a p p l i c a n t : Mr P . D o h e r t y

i n s t r u c t e d b y E l o r t b n o r e Hale Davy fi Leake

. for t h e r e s p o n d e n t : Plr M. McPhee

i n s t r u c t e d b y r l c p h e e s n ? t l eye r

Date of H e a r i n g : 1 9 F e b r u a r y 1 9 8 7

Date J u d g m e n t D e l i v e r e d : 1 9 r e b r u a r y 1 9 8 7