Box Information Technology Pty Ltd v Crystalaid Manufacture Pty Ltd & Anor [2013] QDC 23
1
[2013] QDC 23
DISTRICT COURT
CIVIL JURISDICTION
JUDGE ROBIN QC
No 3066 of 2011
BOX INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PTY LTD
(ACN 097 484 270) Plaintiff
and
CRYSTALAID MANUFACTURE PTY LTD
(ACN 009 943 400) Defendant
and
SAP AUSTRALIA PTY LTD Third Party
(ACN 003 682 504)
BRISBANE
..DATE 01/02/2013
ORDER
CATCHWORDS
Commercial list proceeding settled - Parties’ intention to
produce and file a combined notice of discontinuance signed by
all of them not achieved - Order made dismissing claim,
counterclaim and third party proceedings on basis defendant
(not present at hearing) might apply for changes.
-- 1 of 3 --
2 ORDER
1
10
20
30
40
50
60
HIS HONOUR: This matter on the commercial list came before
the court in November when trial dates were vacated on the
court being advised that a compromise had been reached
satisfactory to the plaintiff, defendant and third party. A
mention was fixed for today to assist the court to have the
matter formally finalised and also allow its assistance to be
sought should anything anticipated to occur under the
compromise not happen.
The mention today under the direction given would have been
obviated if a notice of discontinuance had been filed. That
has not occurred in circumstances where the parties were
working towards preparing a single document which would
discontinue the plaintiff's claim against the defendant, the
defendant's counterclaim against it and the third party
proceedings. The executed document left the plaintiff's area
but has not emerged from the defendant's. It is unclear why
that's so. Mr Hutchinson suggests it may be related to some
confusion attributable to a practitioner's relocating.
The notice of discontinuance therefore hasn't reached the
third party, represented by Mr McKechnie this morning. The
court is assured by him and Mr Hutchinson that everything the
parties needed to do, except in relation to the notice of
discontinuance, has happened, any moneys to be paid have been
paid and the like.
The efficient thing to do is to make orders dismissing the
plaintiff's claim against the defendant and the defendant's
-- 2 of 3 --
3 ORDER
1
10
20
30
40
50
60
counterclaim against the plaintiff. There should also be an
order dismissing the third party proceedings. There's a
hypothetical possibility that that affects the defendant,
which hasn't appeared this morning when called,
inappropriately. Given the defendant wasn't here, there'll be
the opportunity for it to approach the court to have orders
made in its absence set aside or changed. I'm not
anticipating that will happen, which means that the court can
close its file on the matter and repeat its congratulations to
the parties for resolving it by agreement.
-----
-- 3 of 3 --
Official source: https://www.sclqld.org.au/caselaw/QDC/2013/023