Ross Ambrose Group Pty Ltd v Renkon Pty Ltd (No 2)

Ross Ambrose Group Pty Ltd, trading as Amross, brought an action against Renkon Pty Ltd, trading as Renkon, in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant's conduct had resulted in the termination of their business relationship and caused the plaintiff loss. The court was required to determine whether the defendant's conduct was a breach of contract, specifically whether there was an implied term in the agreement between the parties that the defendant would not act in a manner that would cause the plaintiff to terminate the relationship. The court was also required to determine whether the plaintiff had suffered loss as a result of the defendant's conduct.

The court found that the defendant's conduct did not amount to a breach of contract as there was no implied term in the agreement that the defendant would not act in a manner that would cause the plaintiff to terminate the relationship. The court also found that the plaintiff had not suffered any loss as a result of the defendant's conduct. In relation to the issue of whether leave to re-open the case and recall witnesses should be granted, the court found that the plaintiff had not shown sufficient grounds for re-opening the case. The plaintiff had failed to establish that the evidence of the recalled witnesses was necessary to determine the issues in the case or that it was in the interests of justice to recall the witnesses.

The court ordered that the defendant's motion to re-open the case and recall witnesses be dismissed. The court also ordered that the defendant's motion for an extension of time to file and serve its defence be dismissed. The court found that the plaintiff had not shown any special or extraordinary circumstances that would justify an extension of time. The court also found that the defendant had not acted with sufficient expedition in filing its defence and that the delay had caused inconvenience and expense to the plaintiff.