Kerisway Pty Ltd v Granny May's Management Pty Ltd & Ors [1995] FCA 249

Kerisway Pty Ltd v Granny May's Management Pty Ltd & Ors [1995] FCA 249

The applicant was ordered to provide security for costs as credible evidence suggested the applicant might be unable to pay respondents' costs if unsuccessful. The transfer application was dismissed because the applicant's choice of venue was reasonable for non-contractual claims, and the contractual forum clause did not bind all respondents.

Parties
Applicant: Keriswey Pty Limited; First Respondent: Granny May's Management Pty Limited; Second Respondent: Robert Michael Smith; Third Respondent: Michael Tenner; Fourth Respondent: Paper Plus Pty Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 April 1995
Procedural Posture
Proceeding Commenced in Victorian District Registry, Equity Division / Interlocutory Stage: Respondents' Applications for Transfer and Security for Costs
Outcome
Application to transfer dismissed. Applicant required to provide security for costs.
Legal Topics
Franchise Agreement, Security for Costs, Jurisdiction/venue, Misrepresentation, Unconscionable Conduct
Equity Contract Law Trade Practices Franchise Agreement Security for Costs Jurisdiction/venue Misrepresentation Unconscionable Conduct

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 15
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Keriswey Pty Limited

Applicant

Granny May's Management Pty Limited

First Respondent

Robert Michael Smith

Second Respondent

Michael Tenner

Third Respondent

Paper Plus Pty Limited

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Proceeding Commenced in Victorian District Registry, Equity Division / Interlocutory Stage: Respondents' Applications for Transfer and Security for Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proceeding should be transferred to the New South Wales Registry pursuant to the forum clause in franchise and licence agreements
  2. 2 Whether the applicant should be ordered to provide security for costs
  3. 3 Whether an insurance policy held by the applicant adequately addresses the respondents' costs risk

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant was ordered to provide security for costs as credible evidence suggested the applicant might be unable to pay respondents' costs if unsuccessful. The transfer application was dismissed because the applicant's choice of venue was reasonable for non-contractual claims, and the contractual forum clause did not bind all respondents.

Court Disposition

Application to transfer dismissed. Applicant required to provide security for costs.

Orders

  • The respondents' application to transfer the proceeding to the New South Wales Registry be dismissed.
  • The applicant provide security in the sum of $20,000 in a form approved by the Registrar as security for the respondents' costs to the end of the interlocutory stage with liberty to apply to increase the amount of security when the matter is ready for trial.