In Freedom Foods Pty Ltd v Blue Diamond Growers  FCA 172, the Federal Court of Australia was asked to ascertain if an agreement could be classified as “franchise agreement” and thus avoid the application of an arbitration dispute resolution clause and if a matter concerning Australian Law, namely claims of misleading and deceptive conduct and unconscionable conduct, was suitable to be heard through an arbitration in California. This case illustrates the importance of understanding your rights in agreements in respect of dispute resolution and whether agreements not identified as relating to franchises can be classified as “franchising agreements”.
The recent high-profile case involving underpayment of award entitlements by the Macquarie Bank gives a timely reminder of the importance (and legality) of written set-off clauses in common law contracts and other legitimate set-off options.
The recent Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (the Tribunal) decision in Owners Corporation No. 1 PS511700W v St Marys Investments Pty Ltd dealt with a dispute over fees charged to a lot owner for services that were provided to a larger development within which the Owners Corporation land was a subdivision. The reasoning of the Tribunal provides insight into which fees charged by an Owners Corporation will be enforceable against Lot Owners. It serves as a reminder that fees are not limited to services relating solely to the land of the Owners Corporation,
In the recent case of Roude v Helwani  NSWCA 310, the Court of Appeal of New South Wales considered an appeal from a judgment of a Local Court of New South Wales Magistrate regarding a claim for reasonable remuneration for electrical and plumbing work performed (quantum meruit). This case illustrates the complexities that can arise regarding claims for payment, the importance of expert evidence in showing what is fair and reasonable remuneration, and the need for a correct strategy in making a claim.