Sagittarian Enterprises Pty Ltd & Ors v. Ampol Ltd [1986] FCA 510

Sagittarian Enterprises Pty Ltd & Ors v. Ampol Ltd [1986] FCA 510

Sub-s.13(6) applies to any proposed franchise agreement, whether by way of renewal or otherwise. If the respondent's lease expired on 2 September 1984, sub-s.13(6) would limit any renewed franchise agreement to expiry on 1 September 1984. Paragraph 5(c) was therefore not irrelevant or untenable and should not be struck out, although its reference to 31 August 1984 rather than 1 September 1984 was a matter for amendment.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 November 1986
Procedural Posture
Application Under the Petroleum Retail Marketing Franchise Act 1980 / Motion to Strike Out Part of the Respondent's Defence
Outcome
The applicants' motion was dismissed.
Legal Topics
['strike Out Application' 'construction of S.13(6) of the Petroleum Retail Marketing Franchise Act 1980' 'renewal of Franchise Agreement' 'duration of Franchise Agreement Where Franchisor Holds Premises as Lessee']
['practice and Procedure' 'franchise Law' 'petroleum Retail Marketing'] ['strike Out Application' 'construction of S.13(6) of the Petroleum Retail Marketing Franchise Act 1980' 'renewal of Franchise Agreement' 'duration of Franchise Agreement Where Franchisor Holds Premises as Lessee']

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

Application Under the Petroleum Retail Marketing Franchise Act 1980 / Motion to Strike Out Part of the Respondent's Defence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether paragraph 5(c) of the respondent's defence relying on sub-s.13(6) of the Petroleum Retail Marketing Franchise Act 1980 should be struck out." 'Whether sub-s.13(6) applies to a proposed franchise agreement by way of renewal.' "Whether the respondent's lease expiry limited the term of any renewed franchise agreement."]

Ratio Decidendi

Sub-s.13(6) applies to any proposed franchise agreement, whether by way of renewal or otherwise. If the respondent's lease expired on 2 September 1984, sub-s.13(6) would limit any renewed franchise agreement to expiry on 1 September 1984. Paragraph 5(c) was therefore not irrelevant or untenable and should not be struck out, although its reference to 31 August 1984 rather than 1 September 1984 was a matter for amendment.

Court Disposition

The applicants' motion was dismissed.

Orders

  • ["The applicants' motion filed 9 October 1986 is dismissed." 'There be liberty to apply as to the costs of the motion.']