Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
C7 Pty Ltd v Foxtel Management Pty Ltd [2002] FCA 1266 PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – preliminary discovery – disclosure to potential respondents Federal Court Rules O 15A
SmithKline Beecham plc v Alphapharm Pty Ltd [2001] FCA 271 followed SmithKline Beecham plc v Alphapharm Pty Ltd [2001] FCA 1898 followed C7 PTY LIMITED AND SEVEN NETWORK LIMITED v FOXTEL MANAGEMENT PTY LIMITED, SPORTS INVESTMENTS AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED, NEWS LIMITED, SKY CABLE PTY LIMITED, TELSTRA MEDIA PTY LIMITED, TELSTRA MULTIMEDIA PTY LIMITED, TELSTRA CORPORATION LIMITED, PUBLISHING AND BROADCASTING LIMITED, AUSTRALIAN FOOTBALL LEAGUE AND NATIONAL RUGBY LEAGUE LIMITED N1077 OF 2002 GYLES J SYDNEY 2 OCTOBER 2002
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N1077 OF 2002
BETWEEN: C7 PTY LIMITED
FIRST APPLICANT
SEVEN NETWORK LIMITED
SECOND APPLICANT
AND: FOXTEL MANAGEMENT PTY LIMITED
FIRST RESPONDENT
SPORTS INVESTMENTS AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED
SECOND RESPONDENT
NEWS LIMITED
THIRD RESPONDENT
SKY CABLE PTY LIMITED
FOURTH RESPONDENT
TELSTRA MEDIA PTY LIMITED
FIFTH RESPONDENT
TELSTRA MULTIMEDIA PTY LIMITED
SIXTH RESPONDENT
TELSTRA CORPORATION LIMITED
SEVENTH RESPONDENT
PUBLISHING AND BROADCASTING LIMITED
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