Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Verrocchi v Direct Chemist Outlet Pty Ltd (No 2) [2016] FCAFC 162 Appeal from: Verrocchi v Direct Chemist Outlet Pty Ltd [2015] FCA 234; (2015) 112 IPR 200
File number: VID 211 of 2015
Judges: NICHOLAS, MURPHY AND BEACH JJ
Date of judgment: 29 November 2016
Catchwords: COSTS – application for indemnity costs – offer of compromise made under r 25.01 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – "walk away" offers – whether offer was a genuine offer of compromise – whether rejection of offer was unreasonable
Legislation: Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 25.01, 25.14(1), 25.14(2)
Cases cited: Austin Nichols & Co Inc v Lodestar Anstalt (No 2) (2012) 202 FCR 506 Barnes v Forty Two International Pty Limited (No 2) [2015] FCAFC 19
Date of hearing: Determined on the papers
Registry: Victoria
Division: General Division
National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations
Sub-area: Regulator and Consumer Protection
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 16
Counsel for the Appellants: Mr C D Golvan QC with Mr T D Cordiner
Solicitor for the Appellants: Rotstein Commercial Lawyers
Counsel for the Respondents: Mr G S Clarke QC with Mr I P Horak
Solicitor for the Respondents: Harwood Andrews
ORDERS VID 211 of 2015
BETWEEN: MARIO VERROCCHI First Appellant
JACK GANCE Second Appellant
AND: DIRECT CHEMIST OUTLET PTY LTD (ACN 123 831 210) First Respondent
IAN TAUMAN Second Respondent
JUDGES: NICHOLAS, MURPHY AND BEACH JJ DATE OF ORDER: 29 NOVEMBER 2016
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