Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
King v AG Australia Holdings Ltd [2002] FCAFC 230
SHANE ROBERT KING v AG AUSTRALIA HOLDINGS LTD & ORS N 955 of 1999 SACKVILLE, HELY & STONE JJ SYDNEY 12 AUGUST 2002
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 955 OF 1999
BETWEEN: SHANE ROBERT KING
APPLICANT
AND: AG AUSTRALIA HOLDINGS LTD
FIRST RESPONDENT
GRANT SAMUEL & ASSOCIATES PTY LIMITED
SECOND RESPONDENT
DAVID MORTIMER
THIRD RESPONDENT
BRUCE HOGAN
FOURTH RESPONDENT
STEWART STEFFEY
FIFTH RESPONDENT
RONALD ASHTON
SIXTH RESPONDENT
MARINA DARLING
SEVENTH RESPONDENT
ANDREW KALDOR
EIGHTH RESPONDENT
LLOYD LANGE
NINTH RESPONDENT
DAVID O'HALLORAN
TENTH RESPONDENT
IAN POLLARD
ELEVENTH RESPONDENT
JUDGES: SACKVILLE, HELY & STONE JJ
DATE OF ORDER: 12 AUGUST 2002
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of 11 July 2002 be dismissed.
2. The first respondent pay the applicant's costs of the first respondent's application for leave to appeal.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 955 OF 1999
BETWEEN: SHANE ROBERT KING
APPLICANT
AND: AG AUSTRALIA HOLDINGS LTD
FIRST RESPONDENT
GRANT SAMUEL & ASSOCIATES PTY LIMITED
SECOND RESPONDENT
DAVID MORTIMER
THIRD RESPONDENT
BRUCE HOGAN
FOURTH RESPONDENT
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate