Warning: Undefined array key "options" in /home/customer/www/doylesarbitrationlawyers.com/public_html/wp-content/plugins/elementor-pro/modules/theme-builder/widgets/site-logo.php on line 123
BTR Engineering v Dana Corporation & ORS - Doyles Arbitration Lawyers
BTR Engineering v Dana Corporation & ORS

BTR Engineering v Dana Corporation & ORS

BTR ENGINEERING (AUSTRALIA) LTD V DANA CORPORATION & ORS [2000] VSC 246

Supreme Court of Victoria – 14 June 2000

FACTS

BTR and Dana entered into an agreement whereby Dana agreed to purchase particular assets from BTR.

A dispute arose between the parties in relation to the forecast of earnings for the business for the year 2000. Dana informed BTR that they did not propose to complete the agreement. The agreement included that a dispute resolution clause providing that any dispute involving their rights and obligations under the agreement would first be subject to negotiations for 60 days and then referred to arbitration.

BTR issued proceedings in the Supreme Court for specific performance or for damages for breach of agreement. Dana served upon BTR a notice of dispute pursuant to clause 7.9 of the agreement (“the dispute clause”) and subsequently applied to thecourt for a stay of the legal proceeding.

ISSUE

Was the lengthy process to settle the dispute a factor for the court to consider when deciding whether to stay the proceeding? Were all the disputes between the parties involving rights and obligations under the agreement?

FINDINGS

To continue reading this content, please complete the form below

End