Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Link Solutions Pty Limited (No 2) [2010] FCA 1463

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Link Solutions Pty Limited (No 2) [2010] FCA 1463

Although the proposed appeal had prospects of success that were more than merely arguable, the Commission gave no explanation for failing to comply with the Rules and file within time, and there was evidence of possible specific detriment to a third party as well as the respondents' entitlement to rely on the expiry of time. The discretion to extend time was therefore not exercised in the Commission's favour.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Motion for Extension of Time to File an Application for Leave to Appeal / After Summary Dismissal of the Proceeding Against EFS and CIT Under S 31 a of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (cth)
Outcome
Motion dismissed; extension of time refused.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'summary Dismissal' 'exclusive Dealing' 'third Line Forcing' 'accessorial Liability' 'prejudice to Third Party']
['practice and Procedure' 'competition and Consumer Law'] ['extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'summary Dismissal' 'exclusive Dealing' 'third Line Forcing' 'accessorial Liability' 'prejudice to Third Party']

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

Motion for Extension of Time to File an Application for Leave to Appeal / After Summary Dismissal of the Proceeding Against EFS and CIT Under S 31 a of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (cth)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court should extend time under Order 52 rule 10(2)(a) of the Federal Court Rules for the Commission to file an application for leave to appeal from orders made on 10 September 2010 and 30 September 2010.' 'Whether the Commission provided special reasons and a satisfactory explanation for filing the application for leave to appeal outside the time limited by the Rules.' 'Whether potential detriment to CIT, Bank of Queensland, EFS, or other respondents weighed against granting an extension of time.' 'Whether the proposed appeal had sufficient prospects of success to avoid an extension of time being futile.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the proposed appeal had prospects of success that were more than merely arguable, the Commission gave no explanation for failing to comply with the Rules and file within time, and there was evidence of possible specific detriment to a third party as well as the respondents' entitlement to rely on the expiry of time. The discretion to extend time was therefore not exercised in the Commission's favour.

Court Disposition

Motion dismissed; extension of time refused.

Orders

  • ['The motion of 7 October 2010 be dismissed.' 'The Commission pay the costs of the respondents to the motion.']