Ellendale Pty Ltd v. Graham Matthews Pty Ltd & Ors [1986] FCA 149

Ellendale Pty Ltd v. Graham Matthews Pty Ltd & Ors [1986] FCA 149

Use of numbers and representations from the applicant's WO numbering system, as set out in the undertakings, constituted breaches and thus contempt, even after discontinuance, and both principal and aider/abettor companies can be held liable; penalty assessment reflects seriousness and deliberateness of breaches.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: Ellendale Pty Ltd; Respondent: Graham Matthews Pty Ltd; Respondent: Graham Harold Matthews; Respondent: Graham Matthews Nominees Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 April 1986
Procedural Posture
Contempt of Court Proceeding / Final Judgment
Outcome
Respondents found guilty of contempt of court in several ways; penalty assessed.
Legal Topics
Undertakings to Court, Discontinuance, Aider and Abettor, Assessment of Penalty, Jurisdiction After Discontinuance
Trade Practices Contempt of Court Undertakings to Court Discontinuance Aider and Abettor Assessment of Penalty Jurisdiction After Discontinuance

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ellendale Pty Ltd

Applicant

Graham Matthews Pty Ltd

Respondent

Graham Harold Matthews

Respondent

Graham Matthews Nominees Pty Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Contempt of Court Proceeding / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether breaches of undertaking given to the court amount to contempt
  2. 2 Interpretation and scope of the undertaking relating to numbering system
  3. 3 Effect of discontinuance of original action on jurisdiction and enforceability of undertakings

Ratio Decidendi

Use of numbers and representations from the applicant's WO numbering system, as set out in the undertakings, constituted breaches and thus contempt, even after discontinuance, and both principal and aider/abettor companies can be held liable; penalty assessment reflects seriousness and deliberateness of breaches.

Court Disposition

Respondents found guilty of contempt of court in several ways; penalty assessed.

Orders

  • Respondents to pay a fine of $7,500 within 28 days to Registrar of Federal Court of Australia.
  • Respondents to pay applicant's costs to be taxed.