Lakshmanan v Janarthanan (No 2) [2006] FCA 832

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Lakshmanan v Janarthanan (No 2) [2006] FCA 832 PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – submission of no case to answer Held – application refused Federal Court Rules O 35 r 2 Hamilton v Whitehead (1988) 166 CLR 121 referred to Hummerstone v Leary [1921] 2 KB 664 referred to James v ANZ Banking Group Ltd (No 2) (1985) 9 FCR 448 followed Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298 referred to Menzies v Australian Iron and Steel Limited (1952) 52 NSWSR 62 referred to Rasomen v Shell Company of Australia Ltd (1997) 75 FCR 216 followed Winterton Constructions Pty Ltd v Hambros Australia Limited (1992) 39 FCR 97 followed ARUNACHLAM LAKSHMANAN & ANOR v PERUMAL JANARTHANAN & ORS NSD 1689 OF 2004 RARES J 8 MARCH 2006 SYDNEY IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1689 OF 2004

BETWEEN: ARUNACHLAM LAKSHMANAN

FIRST APPLICANT

MONTBLUE PTY LTD (ACN 087 324 507)

SECOND APPLICANT

AND: PERUMAL JANARTHANAN

FIRST RESPONDENT

JANA HOLDINGS PTY LTD (ACN 002 252 066)

SECOND RESPONDENT

ROBERT PETER ROSS-EDWARDS

THIRD RESPONDENT

NICHOLAS ANNABEL PTY LTD (ACN 063 012 340)

FOURTH RESPONDENT

CASSONE HOLDINGS PTY LTD (ACN 002 821 623)

FIFTH RESPONDENT

STANLEY ROBERT SHAW

SIXTH RESPONDENT

ELKVILLE HOLDINGS PTY LTD (ACN 002 683 481)

SEVENTH RESPONDENT

JUDGE: RARES J

DATE OF ORDER: 8 MARCH 2006

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application of the fifth respondent that the Court rule on whether there is no case for it to answer be dismissed.

Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules. IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA