Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Dubow v Fitness First (Australia) Pty Ltd [2010] FCA 660 Citation: Dubow v Fitness First (Australia) Pty Ltd [2010] FCA 660
On appeal from: In NSD 523 of 2010: Dubow v Fitness First Australia Pty Ltd (No 3) [2010] FMCA 287 In NSD 526 of 2010: Application for leave to appeal and for extension of time: Dubow v Fitness First Australia Pty Ltd (No 2) [2010] FMCA 286
Parties: YOLANDE VICTORIA FRANCES DUBOW v FITNESS FIRST (AUSTRALIA) PTY LTD
File numbers: NSD 523 of 2010 NSD 526 of 2010
Judge: FLICK J
Date of judgment: 24 June 2010
Catchwords: In NSD 523 of 2010: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – stay of proceedings – power to impose conditions – stay granted subject to conditions and until further order In NSD 526 of 2010: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – leave to appeal – extension of time sought – arguments in support have little merit – leave refused – Notice of Motion dismissed
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), s 29, s 37M Federal Court Rules, O 52 r 17
Cases cited: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v BMW (Australia) Ltd (No. 2) [2003] FCA 864, followed Australian Solar Mesh Sales Pty Ltd v Anderson [1999] FCA 964, cited CSR Limited, in the matter of CSR Limited [2010] FCAFC 34, cited Décor Corporation Pty Ltd v Dart Industries Inc (1991) 33 FCR 397, cited Dubow v Fitness First Australia Pty Ltd [2010] FMCA 56, cited Dubow v Fitness First Australia Pty Ltd (No 2) [2010] FMCA 286, leave to appeal refused Dubow v Fitness First Australia Pty Ltd (No 3) [2010] FMCA 287, considered Freeman v National Australia Bank Ltd [2002] FCA 427, cited Harbour City Real Estate Pty Ltd (t/as Re/Max Harbour City Real Estate) v Cargill [2008] FCA 1382, cited Harrington v Rich [2008] FCAFC 61, 166 FCR 440, cited Jarrett v Seymour (1993) 46 FCR 557, cited McBride v Sandland (No 2) (1918) 25 CLR 369, followed Reynolds v Aluma-Lite Products Pty Ltd [2010] FCA 322, cited Stirling Harbour Services Pty Ltd v Bunbury Port Authority (No 2) [2000] FCA 87, followed Welcome Real-Time SA v Catuity Inc (No 2) [2002] FCA 258, cited
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