Bella Products Pty Ltd v Creative Designs International Ltd (2009) 258 ALR 538

Facts: There was a dispute between the Australian (AU) toy manufacturer (Bella Products) and US distributor. AU manufacturer sent a demand letter to the US distributor, alleging breaches of contract & claim under Trade Practices Act. The US company wrote back to ask for more time for a response, which the AU manufacturer allowed. Instead, the US company commenced proceedings in New York. Before responding (and counter-claiming) in NY, the AU manufacturer commenced proceedings in FCA. The US company sought a stay of proceedings.

Held: A temporary stay was granted in AU, pending resolution of the action in NY. Even though the AU court was faster, most of the witnesses were in the US. Ordering a temporary stay is part of the court's power to regulate its own proceedings; AU court was not CIF (not the applicable test). A temporary stay can be granted where proceedings are pending in another court and it is desirable that these be concluded first. The stay was subject to conditions (conditional on the US distributor not objecting to AU manufacturer’s restating its counterclaim in NY proceedings).