Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Deckers Outdoor Corporation Inc. v Farley (No 8) [2010] FCA 657
Citation: Deckers Outdoor Corporation Inc. v Farley (No 8) [2010] FCA 657
Parties: DECKERS OUTDOOR CORPORATION INC. v LEAH JANE FARLEY, DUSIA PTY LTD ACN 119 500 186, LEONID MYKHALOVSKYI, HEPBOURNE PTY LTD ACN 080 453 247, VLADIMIR VAYSMAN, JOSEF VAYSMAN, POLINA VAYSMAN, MILLHOUSE PTY LTD ACN 111 765 505, DIANNE SOMMER, SANDY HAZENDONK, HGU PTY LTD ACN 121 922 754, FEDIA PTY LTD ACN 119 500 444, TASKINC PTY LTD ACN 121 919 926, OTK INTERNATIONAL PTY LTD ACN 119 498 001, GIHAN EZZAT, JOANNE STRICKLAND, VERNON CO PTY LTD ACN 123 047 138, RASTOV PTY LTD ACN 119 498 547, VICTORIA VAYSMAN, OLIVER DOEDERLEIN, MARGARIT PEDROTTI, SAMBA ENTERPRISES PTY LTD ACN 111 968 935 and SANAURIA PTY LTD ACN 123 047 110
File number(s): VID 1022 of 2007
Judge: TRACEY J
Date of judgment: 24 June 2010
Catchwords: CONTEMPT – Court's power to punish contempt - whether disobedience of court order constitutes contempt of court – whether criminal standard of proof applies to contemnors in breach of court order – service of orders alleged contemnors – rationale of contempt to enforce court's decisions – standard of proof
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 31 High Court Rules 2004 r 11.04.1 Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) s 24
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