Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia Mensink v Registrar of the Federal Court of Australia [2024] FCAFC 124 Appeal from:
File number:
Judgment of: ABRAHAM, HESPE AND NESKOVCIN JJ
Date of judgment: 24 September 2024
Catchwords: CONTEMPT OF COURT – whether the Court lacked jurisdiction because service under an order for substituted service was not effective service – whether submission to jurisdiction applies to contempt proceedings - whether the primary judge erred in exercising his discretion to allow the trial to proceed in appellant's absence – submission to jurisdiction applies to contempt proceedings – appellant had submitted to the jurisdiction of the Court – no error in the exercise of the primary judge's discretion to order the trial to proceed in the appellant's absence
Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) 596A Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 24(1C)(b) Justices Act 1902 (Cth) s 63(2) Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 1.34, 10.42, 10.43, 39.05, 42.12
Astro Exito Navegacion SA v WT Hsu (The Messiniaki Tolmi) [1984] 1 Lloyd's Rep 266 Branir Pty Ltd v Owston Nominees (No 2) Pty Ltd (2001) 117 FCR 424; [2001] FCA 1833 City of Swan v McGraw-Hill Companies Inc (2014) 223 FCR 295; [2014] FCA 442 Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v Boral Resources (Vic) Pty Ltd and others (2015) 256 CLR 375; [2015] HCA 21 Coward v Stapleton (1953) 90 CLR 573; [1953] HCA 48 Di Natale v Kelly (2006) 66 NSWLR 130; [2006] NSWCCA 201 Dixon v Wells (1890) 25 QBD 249 Doyle v Commonwealth (1985) 156 CLR 510; [1985] HCA 46 Howard v National Bank of New Zealand Limited (2002) 121 FCR 366;[2002] FCA 1257 Cases cited: In re B (JA) (An Infant) [1965] Ch 1112 Lee v The Queen (2014) 253 CLR 455; [2014] HCA 20 Mensink v Parbery and Another (2018) 264 FCR 265; [2018] FCAFC 101 Mensink v Registrar of the Federal Court of Australia (2022) 294 FCR 101; [2022] FCAFC 102 Mensink v Registrar of the Federal Court of Australia [2022] HCASL 184 Parisienne Basket Shoes Pty Ltd v Whyte (1937) 59 CLR 369; [1938] HCA 7 Re Dulles; Settlement (No 2); Dulles v Vidler [1951] Ch 842 Registrar of the Federal Court of Australia v Mensink (Stay Application) [2023] FCA 1581 Registrar of the Federal Court of Australia v Mensink [2021] FCA 1152 X7 v Australian Crime Commission (2013) 248 CLR 92; [2013] HCA 29
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