Federal Court of Australia
CATCHWORDS PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Cross-Vesting - application to transfer Federal Court proceedings to Supreme Court of Western Australia - related proceedings commenced in the Supreme Court of Western Australia - whether it is more appropriate that these proceedings be determined by the Supreme Court of Western Australia than by the Federal Court - factors to be taken into consideration - in considering whether it is more appropriate that these proceedings be determined in the Supreme Court of Western Australia the Federal Court is no longer to be regarded as necessarily a more appropriate Court to hear a claim pursuant to Part V of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) - considerable weight must be given to the desirability of both sets of proceedings being in the same court where proper consideration can be given to their joint management, possibly leading to an order that they be heard together. Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-Vesting) Act 1987 (Cth) s 5(4) Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) s 52 and s 86A Teserioro v Matstar Pty Ltd & Anor (1990) 93 ALR 607 Central Bore Nickel NL v Richfile Pty Ltd & Ors (unreported, Supreme Court of Western Australia, 22 August 1995 No SG 89 of 1995 T. O'CONNOR & SONS PTY LTD (ACN 001 664 740) v ENTACT CLOUGH PTY LTD (ACN 052 178 088) Branson J Adelaide 22 April 1996
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA) ) SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY) No SG 89 of 1995 ) GENERAL DIVISION ) BETWEEN: T. O'CONNOR & SONS PTY LTD (ACN 001 664 740) Applicant - and - ENTACT CLOUGH PTY LTD (ACN 052 178 088) Respondent MINUTES OF ORDER CORAM: Branson J PLACE: Adelaide DATE: 22 April 1996 THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. Pursuant to s5(4) of the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-Vesting) Act 1987 (Cth) the Court directs the South Australian Registry of the Federal Court of Australia to transfer the whole of the proceedings SG 18 of 1995 between T. O'Connor & Sons Pty Ltd as applicant and Entact Clough Pty Ltd as respondent to the Supreme Court of Western Australia. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
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