Quadrio v Mackay Sugar Limited - [2014] QSC 148

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Quadrio v Mackay Sugar Limited & Anor [2014] QSC 148

PARTIES:

PASQUALE QUADRIO
(plaintiff)
v
MACKAY SUGAR LIMITED  ACN 057 463 671
(first defendant)
v
TABLELANDS CANEGROWERS LTD  ACN 114 759 376
(second defendant)

FILE NO:

SC No 123 of 2014

DIVISION:

Trial

PROCEEDING:

Civil Hearing

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Cairns

DELIVERED EX TEMPORE ON:

3 July 2014

DELIVERED AT:

Cairns

HEARING DATE:

30 June 2014, 1 July 2014

JUDGE:

Henry J

ORDERS:

It is declared that the plaintiff has not committed to a concluded and binding contract with the first and second defendants in the terms of the instrument entitled ‘Tableland Collective Cane Supply and Processing Agreement’.1.

I will hear the parties as to costs. 2.

CATCHWORDS:

CONTRACTS – STATUTORY INTERPRETATION - INTERPRETATION OF THE SUGAR INDUSTRY ACT 1999 – where the plaintiff seeks a declaration that he has not committed to a concluded and binding contract with the first and second defendants in the terms of an instrument entitled ‘Tableland Collective Cane Supply and Processing Agreement’ – where the plaintiff signed the execution page of the Agreement in circumstances where the execution page was not annexed to the Agreement – where the execution page contained no reference to the terms of the Agreement - where there was no copy of the Agreement provided to the plaintiff prior to signing - where section 33(2) of the Sugar Industry Act 1999 requires each grower to a collective supply contract to sign the collective contract - whether by signing the execution page the plaintiff signed a collective contract for the purposes of the Sugar Industry Act 1999

CONTRACTS – FORMATION OF CONTRACTUAL RELATIONS – INTENTION TO BE LEGALLY BOUND – where the plaintiff alleges the parties had no intention to enter into a legally binding supply contract - whether the plaintiff evinced an intention to enter into legal relations with the first and second defendants by signing the execution page of the Agreement

Sugar Industry Act 1999 (Qld), s 29, s 31, s 32, s 33, s 46
Sugar Industry Reform Act 2004 (Qld)

Toll (FGCT) Pty Limited v Alphapharm Pty Limited & others (2004) 219 CLR 165, distinguished

Wilton v Farnworth (1948) 76 CLR 646, discussed

COUNSEL:

MA Jonsson for the plaintiff
MR Hodge for the first defendant

J Jacobs for the second defendant

SOLICITORS:

Greenwoods Solicitors for the plaintiff
McCullough Robertson for the first defendant  CJ Cooper & Associates for the second defendant

The plaintiff, Mr Quadrio, is a sugar cane grower on the Atherton Tablelands. He wants to avoid the potential consequences of having signed a document at a meeting of sugar cane growers and representatives of the first and second defendants at the Tolga CWA Hall on the Atherton Tablelands on 16 of April 2013.

The defendants, Mackay Sugar Limited (“MSL”) and Tableland Cane Growers Limited (“TCL”) contend Mr Quadrio signed a written cane supply contract. That contract, if he is bound by it, requires him to supply…

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 Quadrio v Mackay Sugar Limited

Details

AGLC: Quadrio v Mackay Sugar Limited [2014] QSC 148
Case: [2014] QSC 148
Decision Date: 3 July 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The dispute in Quadrio v Mackay Sugar Limited involved the plaintiff seeking a declaration that he had not entered into a binding contract with the first and second defendants under the terms of a document titled 'Tableland Collective Cane Supply and Processing Agreement'. The matter was heard in the Queensland Supreme Court. The plaintiff, who had signed an execution page of the Agreement, argued that the document he signed was not annexed to the Agreement, contained no reference to the Agreement's terms, and that he had not received a copy of the Agreement prior to signing. The key legal issues before the court were whether the signing of the execution page constituted the signing of a collective contract as required by section 33(2) of the Sugar Industry Act 1999, and whether the plaintiff had demonstrated an intention to enter into legal relations by signing the execution page.

The court considered the statutory requirement under the Sugar Industry Act 1999 for growers to sign a collective supply contract. It examined whether the execution page, which was not annexed to the Agreement and did not reference the Agreement's terms, could be considered a signed collective contract. The court also assessed the plaintiff's intention to be legally bound by the terms of the Agreement. It was noted that the plaintiff had no prior copy of the Agreement and was not aware of its terms when signing the execution page. The court concluded that the signing of the execution page did not constitute the signing of a collective contract as required by the Act, and that there was no evidence of an intention to enter into legal relations with the defendants by signing the execution page.

As a result, the court declared that the plaintiff had not committed to a concluded and binding contract with the first and second defendants under the terms of the 'Tableland Collective Cane Supply and Processing Agreement'. The court will hear submissions from the parties regarding costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

It is declared that the plaintiff has not committed to a concluded and binding contract with the first and second defendants in the terms of the instrument entitled ‘Tableland Collective Cane Supply and Processing Agreement’.1.

I will hear the parties as to costs. 2.

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

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

CITATION:	Quadrio v Mackay Sugar Limited & Anor [2014] QSC 148
PARTIES:	PASQUALE QUADRIO (plaintiff) v MACKAY SUGAR LIMITED ACN 057 463 671 (first defendant) v TABLELANDS CANEGROWERS LTD ACN 114 759 376 (second defendant)
FILE NO:	SC No 123 of 2014
DIVISION:	Trial
PROCEEDING:	Civil Hearing
ORIGINATING COURT:	Supreme Court at Cairns
DELIVERED EX TEMPORE ON:	3 July 2014
DELIVERED AT:	Cairns
HEARING DATE:	30 June 2014, 1 July 2014
JUDGE:	Henry J
ORDERS:	It is declared that the plaintiff has not committed to a concluded and binding contract with the first and second defendants in the terms of the instrument entitled ‘Tableland Collective Cane Supply and Processing Agreement’.1. I will hear the parties as to costs. 2.
CATCHWORDS:	CONTRACTS – STATUTORY INTERPRETATION - INTERPRETATION OF THE SUGAR INDUSTRY ACT 1999 – where the plaintiff seeks a declaration that he has not committed to a concluded and binding contract with the first and second defendants in the terms of an instrument entitled ‘Tableland Collective Cane Supply and Processing Agreement’ – where the plaintiff signed the execution page of the Agreement in circumstances where the execution page was not annexed to the Agreement – where the execution page contained no reference to the terms of the Agreement - where there was no copy of the Agreement provided to the plaintiff prior to signing - where section 33(2) of the Sugar Industry Act 1999 requires each grower to a collective supply contract to sign the collective contract - whether by signing the execution page the plaintiff signed a collective contract for the purposes of the Sugar Industry Act 1999 CONTRACTS – FORMATION OF CONTRACTUAL RELATIONS – INTENTION TO BE LEGALLY BOUND – where the plaintiff alleges the parties had no intention to enter into a legally binding supply contract - whether the plaintiff evinced an intention to enter into legal relations with the first and second defendants by signing the execution page of the Agreement Sugar Industry Act 1999 (Qld), s 29, s 31, s 32, s 33, s 46 Sugar Industry Reform Act 2004 (Qld) Toll (FGCT) Pty Limited v Alphapharm Pty Limited & others (2004) 219 CLR 165, distinguished Wilton v Farnworth (1948) 76 CLR 646, discussed
COUNSEL:	MA Jonsson for the plaintiff MR Hodge for the first defendant J Jacobs for the second defendant
SOLICITORS:	Greenwoods Solicitors for the plaintiff McCullough Robertson for the first defendant CJ Cooper & Associates for the second defendant