Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Perera v GetSwift Limited [2018] FCAFC 202 Appeal from: Perera v GetSwift Limited [2018] FCA 732 Webb v GetSwift Limited (No 2) [2018] FCA 994
File numbers: NSD 950 of 2018 NSD 951 of 2018 NSD 964 of 2018
Judges: MIDDLETON, MURPHY AND BEACH JJ
Date of judgment: 20 November 2018
Catchwords: REPRESENTATIVE PROCEEDINGS – permanent stay of proceedings – leave to appeal – three overlapping open securities class actions against the same respondent – consideration of remedial response to competing class actions – substantially the same claims and substantially the same causes of action – advantages of a funding model linking risk and return to funders by reference to costs incurred – comparative analysis of proceedings including proposals for reducing legal costs and likely return to group members – whether a continuation of duplicative proceedings would amount to an abuse of process – scope of ss 33N and 33ZF of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) – permanent stay of two of the proceedings – leave to appeal granted – appeal dismissed – common fund order – leave to appeal refused – restraint against legal practitioners from communicating with group members – leave to appeal granted – appeal allowed
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