Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Beijing Hua Xin Liu He Investment (Australia) Pty Ltd v Lu [2017] FCAFC 186 Appeal from: Beijing Hua Xin Liu He Investment (Australia) Pty Ltd v Lu [2017] FCA 319
File number(s): WAD 171 of 2017
Judge(s): GILMOUR, JAGOT AND MOSHINSKY JJ
Date of judgment: 4 December 2017
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – whether primary judge erred in summarily dismissing applicants' contractual claims on the basis that they had no reasonable prospects of success – material provides sufficient evidentiary foundation for existence of dispute – applicants entitled to a trial of their contractual claims – application for leave to appeal and appeal allowed – respondents' application for summary judgment dismissed – respondents' application to provide further written submissions after the close of the appeal allowed in part
Legislation: Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 254H Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 31A
Cases cited: Beijing Hua Xin Liu He Investment (Australia) Pty Ltd v Lu [2017] FCA 319 Fortron Automotive Treatments Pty Ltd v Jones (No 2) [2006] FCA 1401 Jefferson Ford Pty Ltd v Ford Motor Company of Australia Limited [2008] FCAFC 60; (2008) 167 FCR 372 Spencer v the Commonwealth [2010] HCA 28; (2010) 241 CLR 118
Date of hearing: 16 November 2017
Registry: Western Australia
Division: General Division
National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations
Sub-area: Commercial Contracts, Banking, Finance and Insurance
Category: Catchwords
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