Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Oswal v Burrup Fertilisers Pty Ltd (Receivers and Managers Appointed) [2011] FCA 536 Citation: Oswal v Burrup Fertilisers Pty Ltd (Receivers and Managers Appointed) [2011] FCA 536
Appeal from: Burrup Fertilisers Pty Ltd (Receivers and Managers Appointed) v Oswal [2011] FCA 424
Parties: PANKAJ OSWAL v BURRUP FERTILISERS PTY LTD (RECEIVERS AND MANAGERS APPOINTED) ACN 095 441 151 RADHIKA OSWAL AND COMICAL ALI MILITANT VEGETARIAN PTY LTD ACN 129 299 172 v BURRUP FERTILISERS PTY LTD (RECEIVERS AND MANAGERS APPOINTED) ACN 095 441 151
File numbers: WAD 142 of 2011 WAD 146 of 2011
Judge: BARKER J
Date of judgment: 17 May 2011
Corrigendum: 25 May 2011
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – whether application for leave to appeal against the refusal of a stay application should be heard by single judge or Full Court
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 25
Cases cited: Allphones Retail Pty Ltd ACN 008 168 090 v Weimann [2009] FCA 849 Burrup Fertilisers Pty Ltd (Receivers and Mangers Appointed) v Oswal [2011] FCA 424 Décor Corporation Pty Ltd v Dart Industries Inc (1991) 33 FCR 397 Edwards v Santos Limited [2010] FCA 34 Henry v Henry (1996) 185 CLR 571 Optiver Australia Pty Ltd v Tibra Trading Pty Ltd [2008] FCA 47 Sterling Pharmaceuticals Pty Ltd v Boots Co (Aust) Pty Ltd (1992) 34 FCR 287 TS Production LLC v Drew Pictures Pty Ltd [2008] FCA 1329 Union Steamship Co of New Zealand Ltd v The Caradale (1937) 56 CLR 277
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