Federal Court of Australia
CATCHWORDS PROCEDURE - entry of judgments and orders - whether agreement supporting such entry - whether defence filed out of time an abuse of process or an embarrassment - whether injunctions or declarations should be granted Corporations Law, ss1323, 1324 and 1325 Rules of Federal Court of Australia, O11 rr13(3) 15(1), 16, 18 and 23, O13 r3, O18 r4 Fraser v Elgen Tavern Pty Ltd, [1982] VR 398 Odin Central Service Pty Ltd v Interstruct (1992) 7 WAR 57 Paynter v Willems [1983] 2 VR 377 Remmington & ors v Scoles [1895-9] All ER Rep 1095 Roberts v Gippsland Agricultural and Earth Moving Contracting Co Pty Ltd [1956] VLR 555. Tomlin v Standard Telephones and Cables Ltd [1969] 1 WLR 1378 AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES COMMISSION v NOEL ANDREW BELL and STEVEN ANTONIO LA ROSA and CRAIG ALLAN HUGHES and DARRELL KEANE BYRNE and PARATOO PTY LTD (ACN 009 455 387) and LAMEEKA PTY LTD (ACN 009 198 618) QUINARY HOLDINGS PTY LTD (ACN 062 602 484) NO. WAG 3008 OF 1995 JUSTICE R D NICHOLSON PERTH 21 DECEMBER 1995
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY) GENERAL DIVISION ) NO. WAG 3008 OF 1995 B E T W E E N: AUSTRALIAN SECURITIES COMMISSION Applicant and NOEL ANDREW BELL First Respondent and STEVEN ANTONIO LA ROSA Second Respondent and CRAIG ALLAN HUGHES Third Respondent and DARREL KEANE BYRNE Fourth Respondent and PARATOO PTY LTD (ACN 009 455 387) Fifth Respondent and LAMEEKA PTY LTD (ACN 009 198 618) Sixth Respondent and QUINARY HOLDINGS PTY LTD (ACN 062 602 484) Seventh Respondent
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