Hi-Fert Pty Ltd & Anor v Kiukiang Maritime Carriers Inc & Anor (No. 2) [1998] FCA 651

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - interlocutory orders granting stays – order of single judge "Leave to appeal is refused" – order made as one of a number of orders – true meaning of order – earlier reasons for judgment published without orders being made – no application before single judge under O 52 r 10 of the Federal Court Rules for leave to appeal - whether Court can grant leave to appeal - Borthwick principle - whether single judge acting in original or appellate jurisdiction of the Court - whether single judge has jurisdiction to determine whether orders interlocutory or final - questions raised of public importance - whether leave to appeal should be granted.

Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), ss 4, 24(1), 24(1A), 25, 51 Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1991 (Cth), s 11(2) Federal Court Rules, O 19 r 1, r 2, O 52 r 10 Thomas Borthwick & Sons (Pacific Holdings) Ltd v Trade Practices Commission (1988) 18 FCR 424, considered and distinguished Driclad Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation of the Commonwealth (1968) 121 CLR 45, cited The Queen v Ireland (1970) 126 CLR 321, cited Décor Corp Pty Limited v Dart Industries Inc (1991) 33 FCR 397, cited Thai v Deputy Commissioner (1994) 123 ALR 570, cited Spiliada Maritime Corporation v Cansulet Ltd [1987] 1 AC 460, cited Autodesk Inc v Dyason (No 2) (1993) 176 CLR 300, cited Wati v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (1997) 148 ALR 578, cited Dallhold Investments Pty Ltd (in liq) v Gold Resources Australia Ltd (prov Liq apptd) (1991) 31 FCR 587, cited The Commonwealth v Verwayen (1990) 170 CLR 394, cited HI-FERT PTY LIMITED & ANOR v KIUKIANG MARITIME CARRIERS INC & ANOR (No. 2) NG 1100 of 1997 BEAUMONT, BRANSON AND EMMETT JJ SYDNEY 12 JUNE 1998

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA