Chasil Ltd v Ferald Pty Ltd [1985] FCA 444

Chasil Ltd v Ferald Pty Ltd [1985] FCA 444

The applicant established a serious question to be tried and a prima facie case of breach of s.52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974. Given the likelihood that the public would identify the bricks in the video with those of the applicant, and the evidence that alleged faults were not due to brick quality, interim injunctive relief is warranted. However, insufficient evidence was presented to justify granting an Anton Piller order for search and seizure, as no substantial risk of destruction of relevant material was shown.

Parties
Applicant: Calsil Limited; Respondent: Ferald Pty. Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 July 1985
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Ex Parte Interim Injunction
Outcome
Interim injunction granted in part, Anton Piller order refused
Legal Topics
Interim Injunction, Anton Piller Order, Section 52 Trade Practices Act 1974
Trade Practices Interim Injunction Anton Piller Order Section 52 Trade Practices Act 1974

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Calsil Limited

Applicant

Ferald Pty. Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Ex Parte Interim Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to interim injunctive relief restraining publication of a video alleged to contravene s.52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974
  2. 2 Whether an Anton Piller order should be granted enabling entry, search and seizure at the respondent's premises

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant established a serious question to be tried and a prima facie case of breach of s.52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974. Given the likelihood that the public would identify the bricks in the video with those of the applicant, and the evidence that alleged faults were not due to brick quality, interim injunctive relief is warranted. However, insufficient evidence was presented to justify granting an Anton Piller order for search and seizure, as no substantial risk of destruction of relevant material was shown.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction granted in part, Anton Piller order refused

Orders

  • The respondent and its agents, servants, officers, or employees are restrained, and an injunction is granted restraining them until further order, from publishing or distributing the documentary 'Safe as Houses, A Special Report'.
  • The further hearing of the application for interlocutory relief is adjourned until Friday, 26 July, at 10.15 a.m.