Federal Court of Australia
ee. 6F
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY )
GENERAL DIVISION
BETWEEN:
JUDGE MAKING ORDER:
DATE OF ORDER:
WHERE MADE:
D GP2 (5.1987
NN
Ky
| Qaresise7 | \ epEQRey GQUAT im reDeoRi gat RBplicant
PALICIPAL / ALGISTRY /
JOHEN PTY. LTD.
JOHN RICHARD COOPER
Second Applicant HELEN MAREE FRANCES COOPER
Third Applicant LAMBEAR PTY. LTD.
First Respondent
WALHIND PTY. LIMITED Second Respondent
MINUTES OF ORDER
PINCUS J. 12 FEBRUARY 1987 BRISBANE
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The application for an interim injunction be refused, with costs.
Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in
Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY ) QLD G12 of 1987 GENERAL DIVISTON )
BETWEEN: JOHEN PTY. LTD. First Applicant
AND: JOHN RICHARD COOPER Second Applicant
AND: HELEN MAREE FRANCES COOPER Third Applicant
AND: LAMBEAR PYY. LTD. First Respondent
AND: WALHIND PTY. LIMITED
Second Respondent
PINCUS J. 12 February 1987
EX TEMPORE REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
There is an application in this Court for a declaration that the first applicant is entitled to rescind an agreement dated August 1984, a declaration that the first applicant is entitled to rescind a certain sublease and guarantees, damages under the Trade Practices Act and in the alternative damages for
misrepresentation.
There is also sought an injunction restraining the prosecution of two suits brought in the District Court of Queensland at Brisbane, which were instituted in August and October last year. There is an affidavit before me by Mr. Brian
Halligan, solicitor for the applicants, and counsel appears today
: 2.
seeking an interim injunction to restrain the prosecution of applications for summary judgment which have been made in the
District Court proceedings I have mentioned.
Mr. Halligan's affidavit discloses that in District Court proceedings, no. 3192 of 1986, the defence was filed on 15 October 1986 and in the other suit, no. 3670 of 1986, a defence was filed on 6 November 1986. The applications for summary judgment seem to have been filed rather late. That is, they were filed only on 28 January 1987 but that is, no doubt, a matter Which the District Court could consider and not really a matter
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