 As a result of Burger King 's actions , Hungry Jack 's owner Jack Cowin and his private holding company Competitive Foods Australia began legal proceedings in 2001 against Burger King 's parent Burger King Corporation with a counter @-@ claim that the company had violated the conditions of the master franchising agreement and was in breach of the contract . In a decision handed down by the Supreme Court of New South Wales that affirmed Cowin 's claims , Burger King was determined to have violated the terms of the contract and as a result was required to pay Cowin and Hungry Jack 's a A $ 46 @.@ 9 million ( US $ 41 @.@ 6 million 2001 ) award . The court 's decision was one of the first major cases in Australia that implied that the American legal concept of good faith negotiations existed with the framework of the Australian legal system , which until that verdict , had rarely been seen in the country 's courts . In its decision , the Court stated that Burger King had failed to act in good faith during contract negotiations by seeking to include standards and clauses that would engineer a default of the franchise agreement , allowing the company to limit the number of new Hungry Jack ’ s branded restaurants and ultimately claim the Australian market as its own , a purpose that was extraneous to the agreement . 
