McDermott, Graham James & Anor v BP Australia Ltd [1997] FCA 108

McDermott, Graham James & Anor v BP Australia Ltd [1997] FCA 108

Although the applicant established an arguable case that BP's refusal to supply may infringe ss 46 or 47 of the Trade Practices Act, the applicant failed to establish a real risk of irreparable harm, principally as it was left open that supply could be obtained from Fletcher Challenge. Accordingly, the balance of convenience did not favour granting a mandatory interlocutory injunction.

Parties
First Applicant: Graham James McDermott; Second Applicant: Go Fleet (Australia) Pty Ltd; Respondent: BP Australia Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 February 1997
Procedural Posture
Application for Mandatory Interlocutory Injunction / Interlocutory Application—reasons for Judgment and Dismissal of Application
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunctions, Mandatory Injunctions, Market Power, Refusal to Deal, Trade Practices Act 1974 (cth) S 46, Trade Practices Act 1974 (cth) S 47, Balance of Convenience
Competition Law Contract Law Interlocutory Injunctions Mandatory Injunctions Market Power Refusal to Deal Trade Practices Act 1974 (cth) S 46 Trade Practices Act 1974 (cth) S 47 +1 more

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 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Graham James McDermott

First Applicant

Go Fleet (Australia) Pty Ltd

Second Applicant

BP Australia Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Mandatory Interlocutory Injunction / Interlocutory Application—reasons for Judgment and Dismissal of Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether BP's refusal to supply infringed s 46 or s 47 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether applicant should be granted a mandatory interlocutory injunction requiring supply of petroleum products
  3. 3 Whether balance of convenience favours grant of interlocutory injunction

Ratio Decidendi

Although the applicant established an arguable case that BP's refusal to supply may infringe ss 46 or 47 of the Trade Practices Act, the applicant failed to establish a real risk of irreparable harm, principally as it was left open that supply could be obtained from Fletcher Challenge. Accordingly, the balance of convenience did not favour granting a mandatory interlocutory injunction.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The notice of motion is dismissed.
  • The application for release from the Supreme Court undertaking is refused.