Jefferson Ford Pty Ltd v Ford Motor Company of Australia Limited

JurisdictionAustralia Federal only
CourtFederal Court
Judgment Date15 April 2008
Neutral Citation[2008] FCAFC 60

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Jefferson Ford Pty Ltd v Ford Motor Company of Australia Limited [2008] FCAFC 60


PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – orders for judgment for cross-respondents on part of cross-claim made under s 31A(2) of Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) – balance of cross-claim remaining on foot – nature of orders – interlocutory or final – test for determining nature of order – legal effect of judgment – whether judgment or order under s 31A for party on part or all of claim finally disposes rights of parties – applicability of case law concerning dismissal of proceedings that are frivolous or vexatious, do not disclose a cause of action, or are an abuse of the process of the Court – applicability of case law concerning summary judgment under Federal Court Rules, O 20 r 2


TRADE PRACTICES – unconscionable conduct – claim pursuant to s 51AC(1) of Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) – relationship between sub-ss 51AC(1) and (9) – meaning of “price” in s 51AC(9) – price of “supply or possible supply of goods or services” – whether prices in all transactions between parties must be aggregated regardless of limited time at which conduct alleged to be unconscionable


STATUTORY INTERPRETATION – Legislation – Interpretation and construction – legislative intent behind s 31A – construction of test in s 31A – purposive test, Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth), s 15AA – legislative intent behind s 51AC – whether sub-s 51AC(9) intended to provide an exception to sub-s 51AC(1) – onus of proof


Words and phrases – “summary judgment”, “no reasonable prospect of success”, “interlocutory order”, “final order”, “give judgment”, “judgment, decree or order”, “supply or possibly supply of goods or services”, “at a price in excess of”


Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth), sub-ss 15AB(1)(a), 2(e), 15AA
Bankruptcy Act 1883 (UK), s 4(1)(g)
Common Law Procedure Act 1852 (UK), s 41
Evidence Act 1995 (Cth), s 190(4), 191
Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), ss 24, 31A, 31A(2), 38, 59(1), 59(2)(l)
Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986 (Cth)
Judiciary Act 1903, s 35
Migration Act 1958 (Cth)
Migration Litigation Reform Act 2005 (Cth)
Migration Litigation Reform Bill 2005 (Cth)
Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth),s 20
Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth),ss 51AC, 51AC(1), 51AC(3)(g), 51AD, 51AE, 52, 53(a), 53(c), 53(eb), 53(g), 80, 82, 86(1), and 87
Trade Practices Amendment Bill (No 1) 2000
Trade Practices Amendment Act (No 1) 2001
Trade Practices Amendment (Fair Trading) Act 1998
(Cth)
Trade Practices (Industry Codes – Franchising) Regulations 1998 (Cth)
Trade Practices Legislation Amendment (No 1) Act 2007 (Cth)
Federal Court Rules, O 6 rr 1 and 6, O 14, O 20 r 5, O 53 r 20(1)(a)


Adler v Ferguson
[1962] VR 129
Agar v Hyde (2000) 201 CLR 552
Anshun (No 1) 147 CLR 35
Application by the Chief Commissioner of Police, In the Matter of an (Vic) (2005) 214 ALR 422
Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Edensor Nominees Pty Limited (2001) 204 CLR 559
Australian Securities Commission v Marlborough Gold Mines Ltd (1993) 177 CLR 485
Automotive, Food, Metals Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union v Mechanical Engineering Services Pty Ltd [2007] FCA 1736
Banque Commerciale SA (en liquidation) v Akhil Holdings Ltd (1990) 169 CLR 279
Bass v Permanent Trustee Co Ltd (1999) 198 CLR 334
Batistatos v Roads and Traffic Authority (NSW) (2006) 226 CLR 256
Behrens v Pelletier (1996) 516 US 299
Berowra Holdings Pty Ltd v Gordon (2006) 225 CLR 364
Bienstein v Bienstein (2003) 195 ALR 225
Blair v Curran (1939) 62 CLR 464
Boase v Seven Network (Operations) Ltd [2005] WASC 89
Boston Commercial Services Pty Ltd v GE Capital Finance Australasia Pty Ltd (2006) 70 IPR 146
Briggs v Glentham Pty Ltd (1992) 8 WAR 339
Bucknell, Ex parte (1936) 56 CLR 221
Burton v Shire of Bairnsdale (1908) 7 CLR 76
Carr v Finance Corporation of Australia Ltd (No 1) (1981) 147 CLR 246
Chugg v Pacific Dunlop Ltd (1990) 170 CLR 249
Commonwealth Bank of Australia v ACN 000 247 601 Pty Ltd (in liq) [2006] FCA 1416
Country Estates Pty Ltd v Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd (1975) 49 ALJR 173
Cox Brothers (Australia) Ltd v Cox (1934) 50 CLR 314
Crayford Freight Services Ltd v Coral Seatel Navigation Co (1998) 82 FCR 328
Cubillo v Commonwealth (2001) 112 FCR 455
Dai v Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman [2000] FCA 717
Dai v Telstra Corporation Ltd (2000) 171 ALR 348
David Syme & Co Ltd v Lloyd [1984] 3 NSWLR 346
Debtor, In re a (1903) 19 TLR 152
Dey v Victorian Railways Commissioners (1949) 78 CLR 62
Dombey & Son Ltd v Playfair Brothers [1897] 1 QB 368
Dudgeon v Chie (1955) 92 CLR 342
Duncan v Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services [2007] FCA 507
Dunstan v Simmie & Co Pty Ltd [1978] VR 669
Egglishaw v Australian Crimes Commission [2007] FCAFC 183
Fancourt v Mercantile Credits Ltd (1983) 154 CLR 87
Finance Facilities Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1971) 127 CLR 106
Fortron Automotive Treatments Pty Ltd v Jones (No 2) [2006] FCA 1401
General Steel Industries Inc v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) (1964) 112 CLR 125
Gerlach v Clifton Bricks Ltd (2002) 209 CLR 478
Gilsan (International) Ltd v Optus Networks Pty Ltd [2004] NSWSC 1077
Gurney, Re [1896] 2 Ch 863
Hall v Nominal Defendant (1966) 117 CLR 423
Hill v Fladgate [1910] 1 Ch 489
Hope v RCA Photophone of Australia Pty Ltd (1937) 59 CLR 348
Hunt v Knabe (No 2) (1992) 8 WAR 96
Hunt v The Allied Bakeries Ltd [1956] 1 WLR 1326
Jacobs v Booth’s Distillery Co (1901) 85 LT 262
John Grant & Sons Ltd v Trocadero Building and Investment Co Ltd (1938) 60 CLR 1
Johnson v Jones (1995) 515 US 304
Kathleen Investments (Aust) Ltd v Australian Atomic Energy Commission (1977) 139 CLR 117
King Investment Solutions Pty Ltd v Hussain [2005] NSWSC 1076
Lashansky v Bruvecchis Pty Ltd [2005] FCAFC 64
Leach v R (2007) 230 CLR 1
Licul v Corney (1976) 180 CLR 213
Limitada v Nike International Ltd (2000) 202 CLR 45
Lloyd v David Syme & Co Ltd (1985) 3 NSWLR 728
Lloyd v David Syme & Co Ltd [1986] AC 350
Luck, Re (2003) 203 ALR 1
Mitchell v R (1996) 184 CLR 333
Moldex Ltd v Recon Pty Ltd [1948] VLR 59
Monroe Topple & Associates Pty Limited v Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia (2002) 122 FCR 110
Monroe Topple & Associates Pty Ltd v Institute of Chartered Accountants of Australia [2001] FCA 1056
Nepean Engineering Pty Ltd v Total Process Services Pty Ltd (in liq) (2005) 64 NSWLR 462
Overlook v Foxtel (2002) ATPR (Digest) §46-219; [2002] NSWSC 17
Overlook Management BV v Foxtel Management Pty Ltd [2002] NSWSC 17
Paramasivam v Flynn (1998) 90 FCR 489
Paramasivam v University of New South Wales [2007] FCAFC 176 at [41]
Pham v Secretary, Department of Employment and Workplace Relations [2007] FCAFC 179
Port of Melbourne Authority v Anshun Pty Limited (No 1) (1980) 147 CLR 35
Pye v Renshaw (1951) 84 CLR 58
PZ Cussons (International) Limited v Rosa Dora Imports Pty Ltd [2007] FCA 1642
Reviewability of Order Denying Motion for Summary Judgment (1967) 15 ALR3d 899
Ritter v North Side Enterprises Pty Ltd (1975) 132 CLR 301
Rogers v Asset Loan Co Pty Ltd [2007] FCA 195
Rosser v Austral Wine and Spirit Co Pty Ltd [1980] VR 313
Roy Morgan Research Centre Pty Limited v Commissioner of State Revenue (Vic) (2001) 207 CLR 72
Sanofoi v Parke Davis Pty Ltd (No 1) (1982) 149 CLR 147
Schiffer v Pattison (2005) 143 FCR 328
Simundic v University of Newcastle [2007] FCAFC 144
South Australia v The Commonwealth (1962) 108 CLR 130
Standard Discount Co v La Grange(1877) 3 CPD 67
Tampion v Anderson (1973) 48 ALJR 11
Theseus Exploration NL v Foyster (1972) 126 CLR 507
Thomson v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation (Unreported, Court of Appeal, Supreme Court of Victoria, 16 June 2000)
Union Bank of Australia Ltd v Lambell (1898) 24 VLR 509
Vans, Inc v Offprice.Com.Au Pty Ltd [2006] FCA 137
Vines v Djorkjevitch (1955) 91 CLR 512
Wagstaff v Jacobowitz [1884] WN 17
Weatherall v Satellite Receiving Systems (Australia) Pty Ltd [1999] FCA 741
White Industries Ltd v FCT (2007) 160 FCR 298
Zoia v Commonwealth Ombudsman Department (2007) 240 ALR 624


JEFFERSON FORD PTY LTD (ACN 005 629 897) v FORD MOTOR COMPANY OF AUSTRALIA LIMITED (ACN 004 116 223), TOM GORMAN, BRUCE IAN MCDONALD AND STEPHEN KRUK

VID 547 of 2007

FINKELSTEIN, RARES & GORDON jj

15 april 2008

MELBOURNE



IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

VID 547of 2007

ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

JEFFERSON FORD PTY LTD (ACN 005 629 897)

Appellant

AND:

FORD MOTOR COMPANY OF AUSTRALIA LIMITED (ACN 004 116 223)

First Respondent

TOM GORMAN

Second Respondent

BRUCE IAN MCDONALD

Third Respondent

STEPHEN KRUK

Fourth Respondent

JUDGES:

FINKELSTEIN, RARES & GORDON JJ

DATE OF ORDER:

15 april 2008

WHERE MADE:

MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The applicant be granted leave to appeal.

2. The notice of appeal filed on 21 June 2007 be treated as having been validly filed.

3. The appeal be allowed.

4. The respondents pay the costs of the appeal and the application for leave to appeal.

5. Orders 3 and 4 made by the primary judge on 6 June 2007 and Orders 1 and 2 made by the primary judge on 4 July 2007 be set aside.

6. The question of costs of the motion filed on 26 April 2007 be remitted to the primary judge.

7. The parties have liberty to apply on 7 days’ notice in respect of any matter arising under Order 6.

Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY

VID 547 of 2007

ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

JEFFERSON FORD PTY LTD (ACN 005 629 897)

Appellant

AND:

FORD MOTOR COMPANY OF AUSTRALIA LIMITED (ACN 004 116 223)

First Respondent

TOM GORMAN

Second Respondent

BRUCE IAN MCDONALD

Third Respondent

STEPHEN KRUK

Fourth Respondent

JUDGES:

FINKELSTEIN, RARES & GORDON JJ

DATE:

15 april 2008

PLACE:

MELBOURNE


REASONS FOR...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
56 cases
  • Houston v State of New South Wales (No 2)
    • Australia
    • Federal Court
    • 11 June 2021
    ...FCA 502 ICM Agriculture Pty Ltd v Commonwealth [2009] HCA 51; 240 CLR 140 Jefferson Ford Pty Ltd v Ford Motor Company of Australia Ltd [2008] FCAFC 60; 167 FCR 372 JT International SA v Commonwealth [2012] HCA 43; 250 CLR 1 Kimber v The Owners Strata Plan No. 48216 [2017] FCAFC 226; 258 FCR......
  • Bates on behalf of the Malyangapa Part B Claim Group v Attorney General of New South Wales
    • Australia
    • Federal Court
    • 5 October 2021
    ...FCA 886 Hazelbane v Northern Territory of Australia [2008] FCA 291 Jefferson Ford Pty Ltd v Ford Motor Company of Australia Limited [2008] FCAFC 60; 167 FCR 372 Kowalski v MMAL Staff Superannuation Fund Pty Ltd [2009] FCAFC 117; 259 ALR 319 Lapthorne v Indigenous Land Corporation [2008] FCA......
  • Kelly v Commonwealth of Australia as represented by Services Australia (formerly the Department of Human Services)
    • Australia
    • Federal Court
    • 8 February 2023
    ...see r 13.10(a) of the FCC Rules and r 26.01(1)(a) of the FCR. In Jefferson Ford Pty Ltd v Ford Motor Company of Australia Limited (2008) 167 FCR 372, Gordon J noted (at 406) that s 31A was introduced in order to extend “the power of the court to deal with unmeritorious matters by broadening......
  • Hanson v Burston
    • Australia
    • Federal Court
    • 19 October 2022
    ...[2017] FCA 575 Houston v State of New South Wales (No 2) [2021] FCA 637 Jefferson Ford Pty Ltd v Ford Motor Company of Australia Ltd [2008] FCAFC 60; 167 FCR 372 King v Jetstar Airways (No 2) [2012] FCA 8; 286 ALR 149 Leach v Burston [2022] FCA 87 O’Connor v Ross (No 1) [2002] FMCA 210 Penh......
  • Get Started for Free