Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Taylor v Crossman [2011] FCAFC 139 Citation: Taylor v Crossman [2011] FCAFC 139
Appeal from: Crossman v Taylor (No 3) [2011] FCA 734
Parties: BRENDAN TAYLOR v LYNETTE MARIE CROSSMAN
File number: SAD 169 of 2011
Judges: LANDER, COWDROY AND FLICK JJ
Date of judgment: 7 November 2011
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – appeal to Full Court – alleged contravention of freezing orders – interlocutory application to dismiss or permanently stay appeal – interlocutory application heard by Full Court – "appropriate" to do so – appeal said to be an abuse of process – application dismissed
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ss 25, 31A
Cases cited: Batistatos v Roads and Traffic Authority of New South Wales [2006] HCA 27, 226 CLR 256, considered Crossman v Taylor (No 3) [2011] FCA 734, cited Jones v Dunkel [1959] HCA 8, 101 CLR 298, considered Morley v Australian Securities and Investments Commission [2010] NSWCA 331, 247 FLR 140, cited Pacific Publications Pty Limited v Next Publishing Pty Limited [2005] FCA 625, 222 ALR 127, cited Rogers v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 251, considered Smart Company Pty Ltd v Clipsal Australia Pty Ltd (No 6) [2011] FCA 419, referred to
Date of hearing: 28 October 2011
Place: Adelaide
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 42
Counsel for the Appellant: Mr M Hoile
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