Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Clarkel Holdings Pty Ltd (in liq) v Kelly [1999] FCA 1266 PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Federal Court Rules ("FCR") – application for orders for determination of separate issues under FCR, O 29, r 2 – overlapping factual questions – whether order should be made.
Federal Court Rules, O 29, r 2
Reading Australia Pty Ltd v Australian Mutual Provident Society [1999] FCA 718, followed
CLARKEL HOLDINGS PTY LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) v GRAHAM EDMUND KELLY & ORS NG 469 OF 1998 JUDGE: SACKVILLE J DATE: 9 SEPTEMBER 1999
PLACE: SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NG 469 OF 1998
BETWEEN: CLARKEL HOLDINGS PTY LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION)
Applicant
AND: GRAHAM EDMUND KELLY
First Respondent
NOVOGEN LIMITED
Second Respondent
ORGANIC GOLD PTY LIMITED
Third Respondent
BENDE HOLDINGS PTY LIMITED
Fourth Respondent
CLARK RESOURCES PTY LIMITED
Fifth Respondent
NOVOGEN RESEARCH PTY LIMITED
Sixth Respondent
NOVOGEN LABORATORIES PTY LIMITED
Seventh Respondent
JUDGE: SACKVILLE J
DATE OF ORDER: 9 SEPTEMBER 1999
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The proceedings stand over until 9.30 am on 22 October 1999. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NG 469 OF 1998
BETWEEN: CLARKEL HOLDINGS PTY LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION)
Applicant
AND: GRAHAM EDMUND KELLY
First Respondent
NOVOGEN LIMITED
Second Respondent
ORGANIC GOLD PTY LIMITED
Third 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