NCON Australia Ltd v Spotlight Pty Ltd [No 4]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

COMMERCIAL AND EQUITY DIVISION

COMMERCIAL LIST

No. 8246 of 2009

NCON AUSTRALIA LIMITED (ARBN 099 019 851)	Plaintiff
v
SPOTLIGHT PTY LTD (ACN 005 180 861)	Defendant

---

JUDGE:	ROBSON J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	9 May 2011
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	23 June 2011
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	NCON Australia Ltd v Spotlight Pty Ltd [No 4]
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2011] VSC 271

---

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application by plaintiff to reopen its case to amend its particulars of loss and damage and to lead further evidence in support – Relevant principles to granting leave to reopen a party’s case after the trial concludes but before judgment issued – Application granted.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Plaintiff	Mr M D G Heaton QC with Dr M R Sharpe	Peter G Richards
For the Defendant	Dr C L Pannam QC with Mr R Garratt QC and Ms R B Sion	Cornwall Stodart

TABLE OF CONTENTS

THE DAMAGES CLAIMS............................................................................................................... 2

ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSED FURTHER EVIDENCE...................................................... 12

INSTALLATION COSTS OF THE YES BOXES....................................................................... 12

MANUFACTURING COST OF THE YES BOXES................................................................... 13

THE COMMISSION EXPENSES................................................................................................. 15

COMMISSION TO GSG................................................................................................................ 15

COMMISSION TO MR REIBEL.................................................................................................. 16

COMMISSION TO SME................................................................................................................ 17

NCON’S LIABILITY TO PAY COMMISSIONS....................................................................... 17

OTHER EXPENSES......................................................................................................................... 18

OVERHEADS................................................................................................................................... 18

REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE................................................................................................ 20

MANAGEMENT COSTS OF ROLL-OUT.................................................................................. 21

FREIGHT AND SHIPPING COSTS............................................................................................ 22

OTHER MARKETING EXPENSES.............................................................................................. 23

OTHER FINANCIERS.................................................................................................................... 23

FURTHER EVIDENCE ON INCOME......................................................................................... 24

GENERAL OBSERVATIONS BY NCON ON FAILURE TO LEAD EVIDENCE............... 25

THE LEGAL PRINCIPLES............................................................................................................. 27

NCON’S SUBMISSIONS............................................................................................................... 29

SPOTLIGHT’S SUBMISSIONS.................................................................................................... 31

APPLYING THE LEGAL PRINCIPLES TO THIS CASE........................................................ 35

THE AMENDED PARTICULARS................................................................................................ 36

THE FURTHER EVIDENCE.......................................................................................................... 37

SCHEDULE A................................................................................................................................... 39

SCHEDULE B................................................................................................................................... 41

SCHEDULE C................................................................................................................................... 44

SCHEDULE D................................................................................................................................... 47

SCHEDULE E.................................................................................................................................... 49

HIS HONOUR:

INTRODUCTION

1           NCON has brought proceedings against Spotlight claiming damages for breach of contract.  NCON alleges that it agreed with Spotlight under a Rental Agreement to lease electrical devices, called Yes boxes, for use in Spotlight’s stores for five years.  Spotlight has some 106 stores throughout Australia selling fabrics and other haberdashery items.  Each store, depending on its size, would take one two or three Yes boxes.  The Yes boxes were to be installed between the power meter and the fluorescent overhead lights in the shop.  The Yes boxes reduce the voltage of the power flow to the lights enabling less electricity to be used in store lighting.  There is allegedly no discernable loss of light to Spotlight’s customers.  Spotlight deny any binding agreement was reached and deny the loss of light is not discernable.

2           The matter was heard before me over 12 days beginning 15 February 2011 and concluding on 2 March 2011.  I reserved my decision.  Several weeks later, I forwarded a memorandum to the parties indicating that I proposed to reconvene the hearing of the proceeding to hear submissions on whether or not NCON wished to apply to re-open its case on damages.[1]

[1]23 March…