Smart Company Pty Ltd v Clipsal Australia Pty Ltd

Smart Company Pty Ltd sought to enforce a non-compete clause in a contract against Clipsal Australia Pty Ltd, claiming that Clipsal had breached the agreement by engaging in activities that were in competition with Smart. The case was heard in the Federal Court of Australia. The primary legal issue was whether Clipsal had breached the non-compete clause and whether Smart was entitled to the costs associated with the case.

The court considered whether Clipsal had indeed engaged in activities that contravened the non-compete clause and if Smart was entitled to the significant costs it claimed. The court found that Clipsal had not breached the non-compete clause as Smart had failed to establish a direct connection between Clipsal's activities and the non-compete clause. Additionally, the court ruled that Smart was not entitled to the extensive costs it sought, as many of the costs claimed were a result of Smart's own amendments to the statement of claim, which led to wasted costs for Clipsal.

Given the findings, the court ordered that Smart pay Clipsal's costs, which included costs thrown away due to Smart's amendments to the statement of claim and other associated costs. The court also specified which costs were not to be included in the award. Finally, the court dismissed Clipsal's application for leave to have the costs taxed immediately.