Federal Court of Australia
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NG 892 of 1998
BETWEEN: DERMOPRODUCTS PTY LIMITED & ORS
Applicant
AND: INNOVATEC (AUSTRALIAN DIVISION) PTY LIMITED & ORS
Respondent
JUDGE: THE HON JUSTICE MARCUS EINFELD AO
DATE: 4 DECEMBER 1998
PLACE: SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT In my view, the application to the Supreme Court of Victoria to cross-vest to the Federal Court should be expedited to the maximum possible extent by the parties. I decline the application to stay the Federal Court proceedings in the New South Wales Registry and the application to transfer the proceedings to the Victorian Registry of the Federal Court, but I leave open the possibility that the case may be transferred to the Victorian Supreme Court depending on the attitude of that court to the application to cross-vest its proceedings to the Federal Court. I do not want to foreshadow what the Supreme Court of Victoria might do or put any pressure on that Court so I will adjourn to 29 January 1999 the question of whether the matter should be cross-vested to the Victorian Supreme Court. I certify that this page is a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Marcus Einfeld AO
Associate: Dated: 4 December 1998
Counsel for the Applicants: Mr K. G. Odgers
Solicitor for the Applicants: Sparke Helmore
Counsel for the Respondents: Mr M. Strang
Solicitor for the Respondents: Davis & Marks Barristers & Solicitors
Date of Hearing: 4 December 1998
Date of Judgment: 4 December 1998
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