Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Wu v Li [2015] FCAFC 109 Citation: Wu v Li [2015] FCAFC 109
Appeal from: Li v Wu [2013] FCA 1067
Parties: TAO WU v YU XIN LI; YU XIN LI v TAO WU
File number: ACD 116 of 2013
Judges: FOSTER, DAVIES AND RANGIAH JJ
Date of judgment: 17 August 2015
Catchwords: CONTRACTS – appeal from decision of a single judge of the Federal Court of Australia – construction of contract – shareholder agreements – claim by respondent of entitlement under indemnity provisions – meaning of "member loan" in indemnity provisions – whether primary judge erred in quantification of respondent's entitlement – where respondent alleged misleading and deceptive conduct by appellant – whether primary judge erred in holding that respondent had not proved his loss – where respondent alleged breach of contract by appellant – whether primary judge erred in finding no contravention of shareholder agreements EVIDENCE – when statement in an agreement or contractual document will constitute admissible evidence of an admission COSTS – where respondent succeeded on one claim but not others – whether the primary judge erred in ordering appellant to pay respondent's costs
Legislation: Fair Trading Act 1992 (ACT) s 46 Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) s 191 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 43
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