VENTURE INDUSTRIES v THE AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION & CONSUMER COMMISSION [1998] NSWCA 249

VENTURE INDUSTRIES v THE AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION & CONSUMER COMMISSION [1998] NSWCA 249

A stay should be granted only if adequate security can be provided for the full judgment sum, interest, and costs. As security offered was inadequate and parties should negotiate appropriate security, stay was not granted; instead, ACCC is required not to execute the judgment during the adjournment to allow parties to agree on security terms.

Parties
Claimant: Venture Industries; Respondent: The Australian Competition & Consumer Commission; Second Claimant: Harry Kioussis; Non Party Property Owner: Angela Kioussis
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 March 1998
Procedural Posture
Application for Stay / Post Appeal, Pending Special Leave Application
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Security for Costs, Measure of Damages

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Venture Industries

Claimant

The Australian Competition & Consumer Commission

Respondent

Harry Kioussis

Second Claimant

Angela Kioussis

Non Party Property Owner

Procedural Posture

Application for Stay / Post Appeal, Pending Special Leave Application

  1. 1 Whether a stay should be granted pending special leave application to the High Court
  2. 2 Adequacy of security offered for the sums awarded
  3. 3 Appropriate measure of damages under section 87(1A) of the Trade Practices Act 1974

Ratio Decidendi

A stay should be granted only if adequate security can be provided for the full judgment sum, interest, and costs. As security offered was inadequate and parties should negotiate appropriate security, stay was not granted; instead, ACCC is required not to execute the judgment during the adjournment to allow parties to agree on security terms.