McBride v Monzie Pty Ltd [2007] FCA 1947

McBride v Monzie Pty Ltd [2007] FCA 1947

The compliance of the proceeding with s 33C(1)(a) must be assessed by whether the applicant has a claim against each respondent, as established by the authority of Bray v Hoffman-La Roche Ltd, which overrules Philip Morris (Australia) Ltd v Nixon on this point; and there is no justification to discontinue the proceeding under s 33N as common issues exist and group litigation serves access to justice.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 December 2007
Procedural Posture
Representative Proceeding / Interlocutory Application to Discontinue Representative Proceeding and Contest of Compliance With S 33 C
Outcome
Applications to prevent the proceeding continuing as a representative proceeding are dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['representative Proceedings' 'class Actions' 'statutory Interpretation' 'precedent']
['civil Procedure'] ['representative Proceedings' 'class Actions' 'statutory Interpretation' 'precedent']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Representative Proceeding / Interlocutory Application to Discontinue Representative Proceeding and Contest of Compliance With S 33 C

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the proceeding meets s 33C requirements for representative proceedings under the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth)' 'Whether the proceeding should be discontinued under s 33N of the Act' 'Whether the later Full Federal Court decision in Bray v Hoffman-La Roche overrules Philip Morris (Australia) Ltd v Nixon on s 33C(1)(a)']

Ratio Decidendi

The compliance of the proceeding with s 33C(1)(a) must be assessed by whether the applicant has a claim against each respondent, as established by the authority of Bray v Hoffman-La Roche Ltd, which overrules Philip Morris (Australia) Ltd v Nixon on this point; and there is no justification to discontinue the proceeding under s 33N as common issues exist and group litigation serves access to justice.

Court Disposition

Applications to prevent the proceeding continuing as a representative proceeding are dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The applications by the first, second, third, fourth, seventh, eighth and ninth respondents to prevent this proceeding continuing as a representative proceeding be dismissed.' "The said respondents pay the applicant's costs."]