Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Reckitt Benckiser (Australia) Pty Ltd v GlaxoSmithKline Australia Pty Ltd (No 2) [2018] FCAFC 153 Appeal from: GlaxoSmithKline Australia Pty Ltd v Reckitt Benckiser (Australia) Pty Limited (No 2) [2018] FCA 1
File number(s): NSD 292 of 2018
Judge(s): MCKERRACHER, YATES AND GLEESON JJ
Date of judgment: 14 September 2018
Catchwords: COSTS – where indemnity costs sought – whether rejection of offer of compromise unreasonable
Legislation: Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), rr 25.01, 25.14
Cases cited: GlaxoSmithKline Australia Pty Ltd v Reckitt Benckiser (Australia) Pty Limited (No 2) [2018] FCA 1 Reckitt Benckiser (Australia) Pty Ltd v GlaxoSmithKline Australia Pty Ltd [2018] FCAFC 138
Date of hearing: Determined on the papers
Date of last submissions: 30 August 2018 (Respondents) 5 September 2018 (Appellant)
Registry: New South Wales
Division: General Division
National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations
Sub-area: Regulator and Consumer Protection
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 11
Counsel for the Appellant: Mr B Walker SC and Mr A AR Vincent
Solicitor for the Appellant: HWL Ebsworth Lawyers
Counsel for the Respondents: Mr R Cobden SC with Mr H P T Bevan and Mr B Narula
Solicitor for the Respondents: Bird & Bird
ORDERS NSD 292 of 2018
BETWEEN: RECKITT BENCKISER (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD Appellant
AND: GLAXOSMITHKLINE AUSTRALIA PTY LTD First Respondent
GLAXOSMITHKLINE CONSUMER HEALTHCARE AUSTRALIA PTY LTD Second 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