Designer Pools Pty Ltd v Precision Pools Pty Ltd [1988] FCA 255

Designer Pools Pty Ltd v Precision Pools Pty Ltd [1988] FCA 255

Where there is only conflicting interested testimony as to alleged misconduct, and the applicant's material is vague or diffuse, interlocutory injunctions should not be granted merely because there is a prima facie case; discretion should be exercised against granting relief absent solid evidence for preferring the applicant's assertions.

Parties
Applicant: Designer Pools Pty Ltd; First Respondent: Precision Pools Pty Ltd; Second Respondent: John Allan Bowen; Third Respondent: Brian Kerry Ward
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 March 1988
Procedural Posture
Application for Interlocutory Injunction / Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Application for interlocutory injunction dismissed
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunctions, Misleading and Deceptive Conduct, Section 52 Trade Practices Act 1974
Competition Law Consumer Law Interlocutory Injunctions Misleading and Deceptive Conduct 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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Designer Pools Pty Ltd

Applicant

Precision Pools Pty Ltd

First Respondent

John Allan Bowen

Second Respondent

Brian Kerry Ward

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Interlocutory Injunction / Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interlocutory injunction should be granted to restrain alleged misleading and deceptive conduct under s.52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has established a sufficient case to warrant interlocutory relief

Ratio Decidendi

Where there is only conflicting interested testimony as to alleged misconduct, and the applicant's material is vague or diffuse, interlocutory injunctions should not be granted merely because there is a prima facie case; discretion should be exercised against granting relief absent solid evidence for preferring the applicant's assertions.

Court Disposition

Application for interlocutory injunction dismissed

Orders

  • The application for an interlocutory injunction be dismissed
  • The costs of and incidental to the application be the respondents' costs in the proceedings