Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
King v GIO Australia Holdings Limited [2000] FCA 1869
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – representative proceedings – form of opt out notice Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), ss 33J, 33X, 33Y Federal Court Rules, O 73 r 6 Femcare Ltd v Bright (2000) 100 FCR 331, referred to King v GIO Holdings Ltd [2000] FCA 1543, considered Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Chats House Investments Pty Ltd (1996) 71 FCR 250, referred to Johnson Tiles Pty Ltd v Esso Australia Ltd [1999] 94 FCR 167, referred to SHANE ROBERT KING v GIO AUSTRALIA HOLDINGS LTD (ACN 054 573 401), GRANT SAMUEL & ASSOCIATES PTY LIMITED (ACN 050 036 372), DAVID MORTIMER, BRUCE HOGAN, STEWART STEFFEY, RONALD ASHTON, MARINA DARLING, ANDREW KALDOR, LLOYD LANGE, DAVID O'HALLARAN AND IAN POLLARD N 955 OF 1999 MOORE J 20 DECEMBER 2000 SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 955 OF 1999
BETWEEN: SHANE ROBERT KING
APPLICANT
AND: GIO AUSTRALIA HOLDINGS LIMITED
(ACN 054 573 401)
FIRST RESPONDENT
GRANT SAMUEL & ASSOCIATES PTY LIMITED
(ACN 050 036 372)
SECOND RESPONDENT
DAVID MORTIMER
THIRD RESPONDENT
BRUCE HOGAN
FOURTH RESPONDENT
STEWART STEFFEY
FIFTH RESPONDENT
RONALD ASHTON
SIXTH RESPONDENT
MARINA DARLING
SEVENTH RESPONDENT
ANDREW KALDOR
EIGHTH RESPONDENT
LLOYD LANGE
NINTH RESPONDENT
DAVID O'HALLARAN
TENTH RESPONDENT
IAN POLLARD
ELEVENTH RESPONDENT
JUDGE: MOORE J
DATE OF ORDER: 20 DECEMBER 2000
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