Maybury v Atlantic Union Oil Co Ltd [1953] HCA 89

Maybury v Atlantic Union Oil Co Ltd [1953] HCA 89

The alleged collateral agreement was unenforceable because it would restrict the plaintiff company's express discretion under cl. (3) of the main agreement to determine the date, hour or time of broadcasts. The fourth plea also failed because the agreements did not impose a duty on the plaintiff not to rebroadcast in addition to the weekly live broadcast, and the recording provision was inconsistent with implying such a duty.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Commercial Causes Action Involving Pleas by Way of Cross Action / High Court Appeal After Preliminary Questions of Law Were Decided for the Plaintiff and Judgment Was Entered for the Plaintiff Without Trial by Consent
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['collateral Contracts' 'construction of Written Agreements' 'implied Terms' 'broadcasting Agreements' 'preliminary Questions of Law']
['contract Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['collateral Contracts' 'construction of Written Agreements' 'implied Terms' 'broadcasting Agreements' 'preliminary Questions of Law']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Commercial Causes Action Involving Pleas by Way of Cross Action / High Court Appeal After Preliminary Questions of Law Were Decided for the Plaintiff and Judgment Was Entered for the Plaintiff Without Trial by Consent

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether an alleged oral collateral agreement that the defendants' radio packages would not be broadcast so as to compete with a Bob Dyer session was enforceable consistently with the main written agreement." 'Whether the written agreements contained an express or implied term that each package of radio entertainment would be broadcast once weekly and not more than once weekly.' 'Whether recorded rebroadcasts breached any duty imposed on the plaintiff by the agreements.']

Ratio Decidendi

The alleged collateral agreement was unenforceable because it would restrict the plaintiff company's express discretion under cl. (3) of the main agreement to determine the date, hour or time of broadcasts. The fourth plea also failed because the agreements did not impose a duty on the plaintiff not to rebroadcast in addition to the weekly live broadcast, and the recording provision was inconsistent with implying such a duty.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed with costs.']