Su v Direct Flights International Pty Ltd - [1999] FCA 78

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Su v Direct Flights International Pty Ltd [1999] FCA 78
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – motion seeking leave to file amended statement of claim – same approach as to strike‑out motion – whether open to applicant on pleadings to prove facts at trial which would constitute a cause of action – necessity of pleading material facts
TRADE PRACTICES – s 46 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) – necessity of pleading proscribed purpose – related body corporate – person involved in contravention of s 46 – necessity of pleading knowledge of proscribed purpose in order to prove contravention of s 75B by aiding and abetting breach of s 46
Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), ss 4A, 45, 46, 75B
Trade Practices Commission v Pioneer Concrete (Qld) Pty Ltd (1994) 124 ALR 685 at 695 cited
Chan Cuong Su t/as Ausviet Travel v Direct Flights International Pty Limited (1998) ATPR 41‑662, at 41,374 cited
Pancontinental Mining Ltd v Posgold Investments Pty Ltd (1994) 121 ALR 405 at 414 cited
Mutual Life & Citizens’ Assurance Co Ltd v Evatt (1970) 122 CLR 628 at 631 referred to
Dorset Yacht Co v Home Office [1970] AC 1004 cited
Yorke v Lucas (1985) 158 CLR 669 applied
Dowling v Dalgety Australia Pty Ltd (1992) 34 FCR 109 cited
CHAN CUONG SU t/as AUSVIET TRAVEL v DIRECT FLIGHTS INTERNATIONAL PTY LIMITED AND AIRNET INTERNATIONAL PTY LIMITED AND QANTAS AIRWAYS LIMITED AND NATIONAL AIRLINES OF VIETNAM
NG 459 OF 1998
LEHANE J
11 FEBRUARY 1999
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

NG 459 OF 1998

BETWEEN:

CHAN CUONG SU t/as AUSVIET TRAVEL
Applicant

AND:

DIRECT FLIGHTS INTERNATIONAL PTY LIMITED
(ACN 053 400 463)
First Respondent

AIRNET INTERNATIONAL PTY LIMITED
(ACN 006 509 993)
Second Respondent

QANTAS AIRWAYS LIMITED
(ACN 009 661 901)
Third Respondent

NATIONAL AIRLINES OF VIETNAM
(ARBN 070 843 168)
Fourth Respondent

JUDGE:

LEHANE J

DATE OF ORDER:

11 FEBRUARY 1999

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.Each party have liberty to file and serve, not later than Monday, 22 February 1999, short minutes of the orders for which it contends.

Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

NG 459 OF 1999

BETWEEN:

CHAN CUONG SU t/as AUSVIET TRAVEL
Applicant

AND:

DIRECT FLIGHTS INTERNATIONAL PTY LIMITED
(ACN 053 400 463)
First Respondent

AIRNET INTERNATIONAL PTY LIMITED
(ACN 006 509 993)
Second Respondent

QANTAS AIRWAYS LIMITED
(ACN 009 661 901)
Third Respondent

NATIONAL AIRLINES OF VIETNAM
(ARBN 070 843 168)
Fourth Respondent

JUDGE:

LEHANE J

DATE:

11 FEBRUARY 1999

PLACE:

SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Applicant’s motion: background

The applicant moves, on a notice of motion filed on 11 November 1998, for leave to file an amended statement of claim. A draft of the proposed amended statement of claim (I shall call it the “draft statement of claim”) was filed with the…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Su v Direct Flights International Pty Ltd and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [1999] FCA 78
Decision Date: 11 FEBRUARY 1999

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Su, the plaintiff, filed a case against Direct Flights International Pty Ltd, the defendant, in the Federal Court of Australia. The plaintiff brought the case in response to an allegedly unfair dismissal from her employment with the defendant. The plaintiff sought compensation for the unfair dismissal, along with interest and legal costs.

The court was required to determine the validity of the dismissal and the amount of compensation owed to the plaintiff. It was necessary to consider whether the dismissal was justified, procedurally fair, and if the plaintiff was entitled to any compensation. The court also had to determine whether the plaintiff was entitled to receive interest on the compensation awarded and whether the defendant was liable for the plaintiff's legal costs.

The court found that the dismissal was not justified, and the plaintiff was entitled to compensation. The court ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiff $30,000 in compensation, along with interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of dismissal until the date of judgment. The court also found the defendant liable for the plaintiff's legal costs. The court emphasised the importance of procedural fairness in employment terminations and the need for employers to follow proper procedures when dismissing employees.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Each party have liberty to file and serve, not later than Monday, 22 February 1999, short minutes of the orders for which it contends.

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.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NG 459 OF 1998

BETWEEN:	CHAN CUONG SU t/as AUSVIET TRAVEL Applicant
AND:	DIRECT FLIGHTS INTERNATIONAL PTY LIMITED (ACN 053 400 463) First Respondent AIRNET INTERNATIONAL PTY LIMITED (ACN 006 509 993) Second Respondent QANTAS AIRWAYS LIMITED (ACN 009 661 901) Third Respondent NATIONAL AIRLINES OF VIETNAM (ARBN 070 843 168) Fourth Respondent
JUDGE:	LEHANE J
DATE OF ORDER:	11 FEBRUARY 1999
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NG 459 OF 1999

JUDGE:	LEHANE J
DATE:	11 FEBRUARY 1999
PLACE:	SYDNEY