Federal Court of Australia
bets NO! FOR DISTRIBUTION
Qos
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION
No. WA G 128 of 1987
BETWEEN: DILEUM PTY. LIMITED Applicant AND: GREENALL WHITLEY LIMITED Respondent
MINUTE OF ORDER
JUDGE MAKING ORDER =: Neaves J. DATE OF ORDER : 29 May 1987 WHERE MADE : Perth
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The applicant within 28 days from the date of this order give security in the sum of $7,500 for the payment to the respondent of costs that may be awarded against the applicant in the proceeding.
2. The said security be given by the payment into Court of the sum of $7,500.
3. If the applicant fails to comply with this order for security within 28 days, the proceeding be thereupon stayed.
4. The respondent's motion for security for costs of which notice was filed on 18 May 1987 be adiourned qenerally with liberty to restore it to the list at any time on reasonable notice.
5. The applicant pay the respondent's costs-<\0f motion to and including the entry of this ogder..
on Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in order ¥887
of the Federal Court Rules. FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
PRINCIPAL REGISTRY \ ~ - anil '
et ae rv
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY No. WA G 128 of 1987
~- eww
GENERAL DIVISTON
BETWEEN : DILEUM PTY. LIMITED Applicant AND: GREENALL WHITLEY LIMITED Respondent
CORAM: Neaves J. DATE: 29 May 1987
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Fending in the Court is an application by Dileum Pty. Limited « "the applicant") aqainst Greenall Whitley Limited «"the respondent") in which the applicant seeks an order for the delivery of certain undelivered wines or, alternatively,
damaqes.
The basis of the claim may be shortly stated. In October 1984 and December 1985 the applicant entered into two contracts with Premier Exports SARL, a company registered and carryinag on business in France, for the purchase of a total of 107 cases of French wines. The vendor company is alleged to be a subsidiary in the aqroup of companies of which the respondent (which carries on business in the United Kingdom but not in
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