Federal Court of Australia
ow
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION
BETWEEN:
AND:
JUDGE MAKING ORDER:
DATE OF ORDER: WHERE MADE:
) ) No. G22 of 1983 ) ) )
ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
ABEL EQUIPMENT PTY. LIMITED
(In Liquidation) Appellant
THE NATIONAL CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
First Respondent
ABEL DRAINERS PTY. LIMITED (In Liquidation)
Second Respondent
ORDER
Neaves J. 2 September 1983
Canberra
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The appellant give security to the satisfaction of
the District Registrar within 28 days in the sum of
$2,000.00 failing which the appeal herein 1s to
stand dismissed.
2. The costs of this application are to be the second
respondent's costs in the appeal.
3.
I reserve liberty to the appeilant and the second
respondent to apply on seven days' notice.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
)
)
)
) No. G22 of 1983 DISTRICT REGISTRY ) ) )
GENERAL DIVISION
ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
BETWEEN: ABEL EQUIPMENT PTY. LIMITED (In Liquidation) Appellant AND: THE NATIONAL CAPITAL
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
First Respondent
AND: ABEL DRAINERS PTY. LIMITED (In Liquidation)
Second Respondent
CORAM: Neaves J.
DATE: 2 September 1983
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
This is an application by Abel Drainers Pty. Limited (In Liquidation), the second respondent to an appeal pending in this Court from a decision of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory (Blackburn C.J.), for an order that the appellant, Abel Equipment Pty. Limited (In Liquidation), give security for
the second respondent's costs of the appeal. I shall refer
to the applicant as "Drainers"' and to the appellant as
"Equipment".
On 25 August 1982 the Supreme Court had before it an interpleader summons taken out on behalf of the National Capital Development Commission (hereinafter called "the Commission") which had, pursuant to an order of that Court, paid into Court the sum of $19,582.18 on the basis that adverse claims were made to that sum ty Drainers and Equipment. The Supreme Court ordered that Drainers file and deliver a statement of its claim to the moneys, that Equipment file and deliver a defence and statement of its own claim and that thereafter an issue be tried between
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