Malouf v Malouf [1999] FCA 284

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Malouf v Malouf [1999] FCA 284

Practice and Procedure – Discovery – application for pre-trial discovery refused by primary Judge – whether an order under O 15A r 5 is interlocutory or final – meaning of "final" and "interlocutory" –

Practice and Procedure - Appeal – application for leave to appeal – whether leave is required or appeal lies as of right.

Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) – s 24(1), s 24(1A)

Federal Court Rules – O 15A r 5

Hall v Nominal Defendant (1966) 117 CLR 423 – cons. Licul & Ors v Corney (1975-1976) 180 CLR 213 – cons. Carr v Finance Corporation of Australia Ltd (1980-81) 147 CLR 246 – cons. Sanofi v Parke Davis Ltd (1982) 149 CLR 147 – cons. The Herald and Weekly Times Ltd v The Guide Dog Owners and Friends Association [1990] VR 446 – cited Mercantile Mutual Insurance (Australia) Ltd v Household Financial Services Ltd (unreported, Supreme Court, Court of Appeal, Vic, 22 May 1997) – cons. Brouwer v Titan Corporation Ltd (1997) 73 FCR 241 – cons. Eatts v Dawson (1990) 21 FCR 166 – cited Allstate Life Insurance Co v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd (No 3) (1996) 64 FCR 55 – cons. Levis v McDonald (1997) 75 FCR 36 – cons. John Fairfax & Sons Ltd v Cojuangco (1988) 165 CLR 346 – cons. Salter Rex and Co v Ghosh [1971] 2 QB 597 – cited Tampion v Anderson (1974) 48 ALJR 11 – cited Wentworth v Wentworth (unreported, Supreme Court, NSW, Santow J, 17 April 1997) - cited Ex parte Britt [1987] 1 Qd R 221 – cons.

WARWICK GEORGE STRAUSS MALOUF v JOHN GEORGE STRAUSS MALOUF, PAMELA MARY STRAUSS MALOUF AND OSMAL (HOLDINGS) PTY LTD NG 570 OF 1998 BEAUMONT, LEE AND DOWSETT JJ 24 MARCH 1999 SYDNEY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NG 570 OF 1998

ON AN APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA