Problem scenario on jurisdiction and limitation periods Coastal Wines Estate is an organic winery located on the South Coast of New South Wales (NSW). It has recently entered into a distribution agreement with Jackson Cellars which is a speciality organic wine retailer. Jacksons Cellars has 49 stores across NSW and Tasmania. The contract is valuable, with Coastal Wines Estate hoping to realise sales to the tune of $1.72 million. It was signed in NSW, Jackson Cellars' head office is in Sydney and, of the 49 stores Jackson Cellars owns, 41 are located in NSW. Jackson Cellars has recently learned, however, that Coastal Wines Estate has inadvertently used a fertiliser product which threatens their organic certification. The organic certification was a primary reason for signing the contract, and Jackson Cellars has now purported to repudiate the contract. Given this attitude, Coastal Wines Estate has no desire to be partnered with Jackson Cellars and has accepted the repudiation, effectively terminating the contract. Coastal Wines Estate has come to you seeking to commence action in the Supreme Court for $1.72 million in compensatory damages.

1. On what basis does the Supreme Court have subject matter jurisdiction to hear this dispute? Why not the District or Local Courts? Refer to the Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), District Court Act 1973 (NSW) and Local Court Act 2007 (NSW).

2. Generally speaking, how long would Coastal Wines Estate have to commence proceedings for breach of contract? Refer to the Limitation Act 1969 (NSW). In the meantime, Jackson Cellars has made an application to transfer the proceedings there. In-house legal counsel at Jackson Cellars perceives that the Tasmania Supreme Court might render a friendlier judgment. Moreover, the head of in-house legal counsel at Jackson Cellars owns a holiday house in Tasmania and would like the opportunity to stay there for the duration of the litigation.

3. What legislation might allow the transfer of proceedings from the NSW Supreme Court to the Suprem