Post by ferryfast admin on Sept 5, 2007 13:36:29 GMT -5
Austal launches suit against rival builder
27th August 2007, 6:30 WST
THE WESTERN AUSTRALIAN
www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=77&ContentID=38465
WA fast ferry has launched legal action against rival boat builder Incat and its founder Robert Clifford over a confidential report the Tasmanian competitor circulated to a European client.
Austal started the proceedings late on Friday in the Federal Court, alleging the Hobart catamaran manufacturer breached the misleading and deceptive conduct provisions of the Trade Practices Act and the Copyright Act by sending confidential reports about the performance of one of Austal’s ships to a Norwegian ferry company.
Austal is also suing Incat’s public relations adviser, Justin Merrigan, who worked in Austal’s marketing department until January 2005 and had access to highly sensitive research reports on the performance and stability of the WA company’s ferries, and a senior executive in Incat’s European office, Chris Thurlow.
Austal claims the contents of the report were false and it is now seeking financial damages and other orders including corrective advertising.
Austal took the latest legal step after crying foul to the Federal Court last year when it learnt that Mr Thurlow sent Scandinavian group Master Ferries, which operates between Denmark and Norway, a report unfavourably comparing Austal’s new 126m trimaran against the 101m Austal catamaran.
Austal used special Federal Court rules that allow parties who suspect they have a basis for a legal claim to seek documents and, in limited circumstances, even question potential key witnesses before deciding on fullblown litigation.
Austal held a series of hearings and got access to a range of documents, including the Austal report and two emails dated June 7, 2005, that had the subject header “FW: Ship Motion: tri v 101”. Austal also got the chance to question witnesses, including Mr Clifford, in recent months before deciding to take the legal action.
Mr Thurlow claimed in the email that the Austal trimaran used a huge amount of fuel compared to Incat’s 98m vessel and had been delivered six months late because of technical problems.
Attached to the email was a confidential report by Austal’s research and development department which gave an adverse comparison between the seakeeping performance of the trimaran and Austal’s own 101m catamaran. The Thurlow email said it had taken years for the truth to emerge on various high-speed craft after they had received glowing publicity.
“I believe this will be the case with the trimaran and having read the attached report I am absolutely convinced that this trimaran is a con,” Mr Thurlow wrote.
Austal says the false report incorrectly referred to supposed limitations on the trimaran’s capability and the report was superseded by a later report giving a positive comparison between the trimaran and catamaran when tested in rough seas. Austal said in a recent announcement the inaccuracy of the report had not been disputed by Incat in the preliminary discovery hearings.
Austal said its trimaran was accepted as one of the world’s most advanced vessels of its kind and one was in operation in the Canary Islands and two vessels were under construction for the US Navy as combat ships.
Austal refused to comment further.
Representatives of Incat could not be reached for comment.
The matter is expected to be listed for a directions hearing soon.
MICHAEL WEIR
27th August 2007, 6:30 WST
THE WESTERN AUSTRALIAN
www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=77&ContentID=38465
WA fast ferry has launched legal action against rival boat builder Incat and its founder Robert Clifford over a confidential report the Tasmanian competitor circulated to a European client.
Austal started the proceedings late on Friday in the Federal Court, alleging the Hobart catamaran manufacturer breached the misleading and deceptive conduct provisions of the Trade Practices Act and the Copyright Act by sending confidential reports about the performance of one of Austal’s ships to a Norwegian ferry company.
Austal is also suing Incat’s public relations adviser, Justin Merrigan, who worked in Austal’s marketing department until January 2005 and had access to highly sensitive research reports on the performance and stability of the WA company’s ferries, and a senior executive in Incat’s European office, Chris Thurlow.
Austal claims the contents of the report were false and it is now seeking financial damages and other orders including corrective advertising.
Austal took the latest legal step after crying foul to the Federal Court last year when it learnt that Mr Thurlow sent Scandinavian group Master Ferries, which operates between Denmark and Norway, a report unfavourably comparing Austal’s new 126m trimaran against the 101m Austal catamaran.
Austal used special Federal Court rules that allow parties who suspect they have a basis for a legal claim to seek documents and, in limited circumstances, even question potential key witnesses before deciding on fullblown litigation.
Austal held a series of hearings and got access to a range of documents, including the Austal report and two emails dated June 7, 2005, that had the subject header “FW: Ship Motion: tri v 101”. Austal also got the chance to question witnesses, including Mr Clifford, in recent months before deciding to take the legal action.
Mr Thurlow claimed in the email that the Austal trimaran used a huge amount of fuel compared to Incat’s 98m vessel and had been delivered six months late because of technical problems.
Attached to the email was a confidential report by Austal’s research and development department which gave an adverse comparison between the seakeeping performance of the trimaran and Austal’s own 101m catamaran. The Thurlow email said it had taken years for the truth to emerge on various high-speed craft after they had received glowing publicity.
“I believe this will be the case with the trimaran and having read the attached report I am absolutely convinced that this trimaran is a con,” Mr Thurlow wrote.
Austal says the false report incorrectly referred to supposed limitations on the trimaran’s capability and the report was superseded by a later report giving a positive comparison between the trimaran and catamaran when tested in rough seas. Austal said in a recent announcement the inaccuracy of the report had not been disputed by Incat in the preliminary discovery hearings.
Austal said its trimaran was accepted as one of the world’s most advanced vessels of its kind and one was in operation in the Canary Islands and two vessels were under construction for the US Navy as combat ships.
Austal refused to comment further.
Representatives of Incat could not be reached for comment.
The matter is expected to be listed for a directions hearing soon.
MICHAEL WEIR