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”.
In Sprowles (Liquidator), in the matter of CWCN Pty Ltd (in liq)  FCA 159, the Federal Court of Australia ordered a private and confidential examination of a director who had been charged with serious federal crimes. The case provides guidance about when ongoing criminal proceedings will give rise to ‘special circumstances’ justifying a private examination by a liquidator.
By Alicia Hill, Principal and Evangeline Yong, Law Clerk In the recent case of Knight, in the matter of GMG Victoria Holdings Pty Ltd (In Liq)  FCA 86, the Federal Court considered the circumstances in which the Court can give directions to liquidators in the process of winding up a company. Background Tracey Knight and…
VCAT has had its first hearing in which relief from forfeiture was sought under the COVID-19 Commercial Tenancies regulations. In the matter of PS Market Pty Ltd v Brijcam Nominees Pty Ltd (Building and Property)  VCAT 1468, the Tribunal had to consider the COVID-19 legislation relating to commercial tenancies. This article analyses the outcome of this case and illustrates the importance of parties’ knowledge of their rights in a tenancy agreement and potential relief that may be available depending on the circumstances.