Food Channel Network Pty Ltd v Television Food Network, GP [2010] FCA 372

Food Channel Network Pty Ltd v Television Food Network, GP [2010] FCA 372

The application is an abuse of process because it seeks identical relief previously refused, with no new material, new evidence, material change in circumstances, or exceptional circumstances to justify reconsideration. The applicant's purported new material was available at the prior hearing, and the principles against repeat applications apply.

Parties
Applicant: Food Channel Network Pty Ltd; Respondent: Television Food Network, GP
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 April 2010
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Second Interlocutory Application for Stay of Costs Order
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Interlocutory Applications, Stay of Execution, Costs Orders
Practice and Procedure Abuse of Process Interlocutory Applications Stay of Execution Costs Orders

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Food Channel Network Pty Ltd

Applicant

Television Food Network, GP

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Second Interlocutory Application for Stay of Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the present notice of motion constitutes an abuse of process as a second interlocutory application for the same relief
  2. 2 Whether there is new material, new evidence, material change of circumstances, or an exceptional circumstance justifying reconsideration of the application for stay

Ratio Decidendi

The application is an abuse of process because it seeks identical relief previously refused, with no new material, new evidence, material change in circumstances, or exceptional circumstances to justify reconsideration. The applicant's purported new material was available at the prior hearing, and the principles against repeat applications apply.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Notice of motion filed 31 March 2010 dismissed
  • Notice of motion filed 9 April 2010 dismissed