Metcash Trading Limited v Bunn (No 2) [2009] FCA 1493

Metcash Trading Limited v Bunn (No 2) [2009] FCA 1493

Interlocutory injunctions were granted restraining the respondent from publishing or republishing only the specified, more definitive and unsubstantiated assertions and imperatives in the publication, as the applicant established a serious question to be tried for those elements and the balance of convenience favoured preservation of the status quo in that regard. But restraint of expressions formulated as possibility/prediction rather than certainty was not justified on the evidence, especially given the importance of freedom of speech.

Parties
First Applicant: Metcash Trading Limited; Second Applicant: IGA Distribution Pty Ltd; Third Applicant: Australian Liquor Marketers Pty Ltd; Respondent: Peter Chadley Bunn
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Interlocutory Injunction Sought and Determined
Outcome
Interlocutory injunction partially granted
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Injunction, Freedom of Speech, Section 52 Trade Practices Act, Status Quo, Injurious Falsehood, Defamation
Defamation Trade Practices Injurious Falsehood Injunctions Interlocutory Injunction Freedom of Speech Section 52 Trade Practices Act Status Quo

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

Parties

Metcash Trading Limited

First Applicant

IGA Distribution Pty Ltd

Second Applicant

Australian Liquor Marketers Pty Ltd

Third Applicant

Peter Chadley Bunn

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Interlocutory Injunction Sought and Determined

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the publication should be restrained by interlocutory injunction for contravening s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) and/or constituting injurious falsehood or being otherwise improper given undertakings and public interest in free speech

Ratio Decidendi

Interlocutory injunctions were granted restraining the respondent from publishing or republishing only the specified, more definitive and unsubstantiated assertions and imperatives in the publication, as the applicant established a serious question to be tried for those elements and the balance of convenience favoured preservation of the status quo in that regard. But restraint of expressions formulated as possibility/prediction rather than certainty was not justified on the evidence, especially given the importance of freedom of speech.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunction partially granted

Orders

  • Upon the first applicant's undertaking as to damages, the respondent and his agents are restrained from publishing or republishing, by any means, the specified statements, words, or allegations in the document titled 'T.I.G.A. THE INDEPENDENT GROCERS ADVOCATE 12/1-2009' or words or allegations to similar effect, as...
  • Liberty to the parties to apply at short notice.