Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Sharman License Holdings Ltd v Universal Music Pty Ltd [2005] FCA 505
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – stay – order of primary judge to file affidavit disclosing assets in aid of Mareva injunction – primary judge dismissed application for a stay – present application for stay in the Court's appellate jurisdiction – whether to stay the order requiring affidavit disclosing assets pending the hearing and determination of an application for extension of time and leave to appeal against the decision of primary judge to grant a Mareva injunction – no application to stay Mareva injunction – application for stay dismissed.
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for an extension of time and leave to appeal – whether application to be determined by a single judge or a Full Court – application to be heard by a single judge exercising the Court's appellate jurisdiction.
Federal Court Rules O 52 r 17(3)
Macquarie Bank v O'Reilly Street Nominees [2005] NSWSC 162 cited Netttlefold Advertising Pty Ltd v Nettlefold Signs Pty Ltd [1998] FCA 1209 cited Renaud Cointreau & Cie v Cordon Blue International Ltee (2001) 193 ALR 657 cited Stirling Harbour Services Pty Ltd v Bunbury Port Authority [2000] FCA 87 referred to
SHARMAN LICENSE HOLDINGS LTD AND SHARMAN NETWORKS LTD v UNIVERSAL MUSIC AUSTRALIA PTY LTD (ACN 000 158 592) NSD 563 OF 2005 MOORE J SYDNEY 28 APRIL 2005
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 563 OF 2005
BETWEEN: SHARMAN LICENSE HOLDINGS LTD
FIRST APPLICANT
SHARMAN NETWORKS LTD
SECOND APPLICANT
AND: UNIVERSAL MUSIC AUSTRALIA PTY LTD (ACN 000 158 592)
RESPONDENT
JUDGE: MOORE J
DATE OF ORDER: 28 APRIL 2005
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. Order 1 made on 20 April 2005 be varied so as to operate until 9.00 am on 28 April 2005. 2. The application for a stay of order 6 of the orders made by Wilcox J on 22 March 2005 be dismissed. 3. The first and second applicants pay the respondent's costs of and incidental to the hearings of 20, 26 and 27 April 2005. THE COURT DIRECTS THAT: 4. The application filed 12 April 2005 by the first and second applicants, in so far as it seeks an extension of time and leave to appeal, be heard by a single judge exercising the Court's appellate jurisdiction. 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