Quantification of losses for breach of contract

A breach of contract can broadly be described as the failure to comply with any term of an agreement; some examples include a refusal to perform, incomplete performance, delay or unlawful termination.  Once it has been determined that a breach of contract has in fact occurred, the next question is how to determine the resulting loss and whether it can be recovered from the responsible party.  Whilst there is no hard and fast rule when attempting to quantify losses, there are certain principles which form part of the process of  assessing damages caused by a breach of contract.

[Read more…]

Interlocutory injunctions in patent disputes

An injunction is a Court order directing a person or entity to do a specific thing or refrain from doing something.  Whilst an injunction in itself can amount to final relief in litigious matters, it can also be sought on an interlocutory or temporary basis (Interlocutory Injunction).  This applies where a temporary remedy is sought to maintain the status quo until the larger legal issues can be heard at trial.

In matters relating to the infringement of a patent, an injunction may be sought by the patent owner (Applicant) to stop a defendant (Respondent) from doing the acts the patent owner alleges infringe the patent, until the Court has had the opportunity to determine whether or not the patent has been infringed.  In this article we consider Interlocutory Injunctions in patent matters and how the tests differ from non-patent matters. [Read more…]

Offers to settle: Federal Court Rules c.f. Calderbank offers

In litigation, an offer to settle is an offer by one party to the other to settle the dispute out of Court.  There are numerous advantages to settling a matter out of Court, including reduced legal fees, finality of proceedings and confidentiality of result.  A key issue for litigants when making or receiving an offer to settle is to understand the potential legal costs consequences of rejecting the offer.  In this article, we consider offers to settle in the Federal Court of Australia under both the common law and the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) (Rules).

[Read more…]

What is a Mareva Order?

A Mareva order (Mareva Order), also known as a freezing order or asset protection order, is a special type of interlocutory injunction which restrains a defendant from dealing with the whole or part of their assets pending the outcome of legal proceedings.  In preventing a defendant from disposing of their assets in a way which may deprive the plaintiff of an effective remedy, Mareva Orders are a tool to prevent an abuse of court processes and protect the proper administration of justice.  In Queensland, Mareva Orders are dealt with in Chapter 8 Part 2 Division 2 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) (UCPR). [Read more…]

Discovery in the Federal Court of Australia

On 1 August 2011 the Federal Court of Australia (Federal Court) adopted the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) (Rules) and its revised regime for discovery.  The Federal Court does not require parties to provide disclosure as a matter of course.  Instead, if a party wishes to receive documents from another party (or a third party), they must seek the Court’s permission.  This process is known as discovery.  The Rules are to be read in conjunction with the associated Federal Court practice notes, relevantly Central Practice Note: National Court Framework and Case Management (CPN-1) and Intellectual Property Practice Note (IP-1).  In this article, we consider the process of seeking discovery of documents in a matter before the Federal Court. [Read more…]

The importance of evidence and its ubiquity

A fundamental step when preparing for any litigious matter is to gather evidence to support your legal position.  In Queensland, the rules of evidence are located in a number of pieces of legislation, together with a large body of case law.  The focus of this article is to provide a brief overview of evidence and why it is crucial for a party to any civil litigation matter to devote adequate resources to locating it. [Read more…]

What is your duty of disclosure?

In a litigious matter, once all the parties in the proceedings have filed their pleadings (documents such as a Statement of Claim, Defence and Reply), pleadings are said to have ‘closed’.  Once pleadings have closed, parties to legal proceedings in State based courts are usually obliged to provide disclosure.  Note that this article does not discuss the disclosure obligations in the Federal Court where the obligations regarding disclosure are different.  To many, this process may seem daunting and confusing, so in this article we consider the key elements of disclosure in Queensland under the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) (UCPR). [Read more…]

Do you need to disclose a computer database?

In a litigious matter in the Queensland Courts, once all the parties in the proceedings have filed their pleadings (documents such as a Statement of Claim, Defence and Reply), pleadings are said to have ‘closed’.  Once pleadings have closed, parties are then under an obligation to provide disclosure.  A critical element of providing disclosure is determining what documents each party has a duty to disclose.  In this article, we consider whether or not a computer database is capable of being disclosed. [Read more…]

What if neither party to proceedings takes a step?

It is common for legal proceedings to go for extended periods without any steps being taken by either party.  Each Court has its own rules limiting the actions that parties may take after extended periods of inaction.  In the Queensland Courts, these rules are contained in the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) (UCPR). [Read more…]

Shareholder oppression – Victorian Supreme Court adopts pilot program to resolve oppression claims

On 1 October 2014 (Commencement), the Victorian Supreme Court commenced a pilot program to deal with applications under section 232 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Act).  Practice Note No. 5 of 2014 (Practice Note) describes the new process for dealing with applications to Court seeking relief under section 233 of the Act.  The Practice Note states that the Court will operate a six (6) month pilot program (Program) to deal with oppression actions, for the stated aim of “just, efficient, timely and cost-effective resolution of the real issues in dispute”.

[Read more…]

Dundas Lawyers
Street Address Suite 12, Level 9, 320 Adelaide Street Brisbane QLD 4001

Tel: 07 3221 0013

Send this to friend