Watson v Kriticos (Short Minutes) [2022] FCA 380

Watson v Kriticos (Short Minutes) [2022] FCA 380

The Court resolved the competing short minutes by accepting the Second Respondent's formulation for summary judgment on the breach of contract claim including prayers 6 and 7, rejecting the proposed inclusion of summary judgment for equitable compensation or other relief based on paragraphs 130(d) and 135-137 because that was not the case being pursued, permitting the Applicant's approach to repleading or amendment as identified in the reasons, fixing the Applicant's costs liability for the Second Respondent's interlocutory application at 75%, and requiring any separate issue application to be brought within 28 days.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Practice and Procedure; Summary Judgment and Strike Out in an Intellectual Property Patents Proceeding / Short Minutes of Order Following Judgment on the Second Respondent's Summary Judgment Application
Outcome
Parties directed to confer and bring a minute of order giving effect to the reasons, with the matter listed for case management; disputed short minute issues resolved in the reasons.
Legal Topics
['summary Judgment' 'strike Out' 'leave to Replead' 'amendment of Pleadings' 'costs of Interlocutory Application' 'determination of Separate Issues' 'case Management']
['practice and Procedure' 'intellectual Property' 'patents'] ['summary Judgment' 'strike Out' 'leave to Replead' 'amendment of Pleadings' 'costs of Interlocutory Application' 'determination of Separate Issues' 'case Management']

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

Practice and Procedure; Summary Judgment and Strike Out in an Intellectual Property Patents Proceeding / Short Minutes of Order Following Judgment on the Second Respondent's Summary Judgment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether summary judgment for the Second Respondent on the Applicant's breach of contract case should identify claims including prayers 6 and 7 of the Third Further Amended Originating Application." 'Whether summary judgment should extend to claims for equitable compensation or any other relief based on paragraphs 130(d) and 135-137 of the 5FASOC.' 'Whether and how the Applicant should have leave to replead or amend paragraphs 12(l), 130, 135-137, 154 and 157.' "What proportion of the Second Respondent's costs of the interlocutory application the Applicant should pay." 'Whether any application for determination of a separate issue should be brought within 28 days or 35 days.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court resolved the competing short minutes by accepting the Second Respondent's formulation for summary judgment on the breach of contract claim including prayers 6 and 7, rejecting the proposed inclusion of summary judgment for equitable compensation or other relief based on paragraphs 130(d) and 135-137 because that was not the case being pursued, permitting the Applicant's approach to repleading or amendment as identified in the reasons, fixing the Applicant's costs liability for the Second Respondent's interlocutory application at 75%, and requiring any separate issue application to be brought within 28 days.

Court Disposition

Parties directed to confer and bring a minute of order giving effect to the reasons, with the matter listed for case management; disputed short minute issues resolved in the reasons.

Orders

  • ['The parties confer and, within 7 days, bring a minute of order giving effect to these reasons or competing minutes in the event that they are unable to agree.' 'The matter is listed for a case management hearing on 19 April 2022 at 9.30 am.']