Debco Pty Ltd v Abacad Automation Pty Ltd & Anor [1998] FCA 1508

Debco Pty Ltd v Abacad Automation Pty Ltd & Anor [1998] FCA 1508

The matter should be cross-vested to the Supreme Court of Western Australia because the machine was in Western Australia, the dispute might require inspection of the machine or expert evidence from persons who inspected it, and the original contract provided that it was deemed made in Western Australia, governed by Western Australian law, and contained an arbitration clause referring to the WA division of the Australian Institute of Engineers.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 November 1998
Procedural Posture
Contractual Dispute Concerning an Allegedly Defective Machine / Directions Hearing; Cross Vesting Order Considered After Settlement Agreement and Applicant's Notice of Motion for Judgment
Outcome
Matter cross-vested to the Supreme Court of Western Australia; today's costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['breach of Contract' 'defective Machine' 'settlement Agreement' 'cross Vesting' 'governing Law Clause' 'arbitration Clause']
['contract Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['breach of Contract' 'defective Machine' 'settlement Agreement' 'cross Vesting' 'governing Law Clause' 'arbitration Clause']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Contractual Dispute Concerning an Allegedly Defective Machine / Directions Hearing; Cross Vesting Order Considered After Settlement Agreement and Applicant's Notice of Motion for Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether it was appropriate to deal immediately with the applicant's notice of motion for judgment for damages for breach of contract." 'Which court was the appropriate court to which the matter should be cross-vested.']

Ratio Decidendi

The matter should be cross-vested to the Supreme Court of Western Australia because the machine was in Western Australia, the dispute might require inspection of the machine or expert evidence from persons who inspected it, and the original contract provided that it was deemed made in Western Australia, governed by Western Australian law, and contained an arbitration clause referring to the WA division of the Australian Institute of Engineers.

Court Disposition

Matter cross-vested to the Supreme Court of Western Australia; today's costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['The matter is cross-vested to the Supreme Court of Western Australia.' "Today's costs are reserved."]