Australian Croissant Pty Ltd v Australia on Collins Pty Ltd [1995] FCA 72

Australian Croissant Pty Ltd v Australia on Collins Pty Ltd [1995] FCA 72

There is no evidence to support a serious question to be tried that the applicant is likely to suffer loss or damage as a result of the respondent's proposed conduct. Even if there were, damages would be an adequate remedy; thus, interlocutory injunctive relief should not be granted.

Parties
Applicant: Australia Croissant Pty Ltd; Respondent: Australia On Collins Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 February 1995
Procedural Posture
Application for Interlocutory Injunction / Interlocutory Hearing and Directions
Outcome
Application for interlocutory injunction dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunctions, Misleading and Deceptive Conduct, Trade Practices Act 1974 S 52, Damages as a Remedy, Balance of Convenience
Injunctions Trade Practices Interlocutory Injunctions Misleading and Deceptive Conduct Trade Practices Act 1974 S 52 Damages as a Remedy Balance of Convenience

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Australia Croissant Pty Ltd

Applicant

Australia On Collins Pty Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Interlocutory Injunction / Interlocutory Hearing and Directions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is a serious question to be tried in relation to alleged misleading and deceptive conduct under s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974
  2. 2 Whether an interlocutory injunction should be granted to restrain the respondent from permitting certain vendors to operate in the Food Court
  3. 3 Whether damages are an adequate remedy in lieu of injunctive relief

Ratio Decidendi

There is no evidence to support a serious question to be tried that the applicant is likely to suffer loss or damage as a result of the respondent's proposed conduct. Even if there were, damages would be an adequate remedy; thus, interlocutory injunctive relief should not be granted.

Court Disposition

Application for interlocutory injunction dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The applicant's notice of motion dated 13 February 1995 is dismissed with costs.
  • The applicant is to file and serve a statement of claim and any amended application on or before 8 March 1995.