Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
CRS Technologies Pty Limited v Jowa Group Pty Limited [2003] FCA 128 CRS TECHNOLOGIES PTY LIMITED v JOWA GROUP PTY LIMITED & ORS N 1287 of 2000 WHITLAM J 28 FEBRUARY 2003 SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 1287 of 2000
BETWEEN: CRS TECHNOLOGIES PTY LIMITED
APPLICANT
AND: JOWA GROUP PTY LIMITED
FIRST RESPONDENT
ENVIRO CYCLE WASTE WATER TREATMENT
SYSTEMS PTY LIMITED
SECOND RESPONDENT
JOHN ANTHONY WATKINS
THIRD RESPONDENT
JOWA GROUP PTY LIMITED
FIRST CROSS-CLAIMANT
ENVIRO CYCLE WASTE WATER TREATMENT
SYSTEMS PTY LIMITED
SECOND CROSS-CLAIMANT
CRS TECHNOLOGIES PTY LIMITED
FIRST CROSS-RESPONDENT
AWTS MAINTENANCE SERVICES PTY LIMITED
SECOND CROSS-RESPONDENT
FREDERICK CHARLES SEYMORE
THIRD CROSS-RESPONDENT
JUDGE: WHITLAM J
DATE OF ORDER: 28 FEBRUARY 2003
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT DECLARES THAT: 1. Each of the first and third respondents is guilty of contempt by reason of breach of the undertaking in paragraph 11 given to the Court on 26 October 2001.
AND THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 2. Each of the first and third respondents is fined the sum of $5,000. 3. The first and third respondents pay the applicant's costs of the motion except insofar as they are of an unreasonable amount or were unreasonably incurred so that, subject to such exceptions, the applicant will be completely indemnified by the first and third respondents in respect of such costs. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
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