Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Hi-Tech Telecom Pty Ltd v NEC Australia Pty Ltd [2012] FCA 466 Citation: Hi-Tech Telecom Pty Ltd v NEC Australia Pty Ltd [2012] FCA 466
Parties: HI-TECH TELECOM PTY LTD (ACN 098 008 587) v NEC AUSTRALIA PTY LTD (ACN 001 217 527)
File number: NSD 336 of 2012
Judge: ROBERTSON J
Date of judgment: 9 May 2012
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for security for costs – whether skeleton bill of costs required – evidentiary burden
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 56 Federal Court Rules 2011 rr 19.01, 19.02
Cases cited: Appleglen Pty Ltd v Mainzeal Corporation Pty Ltd (1988) 79 ALR 634 applied Channel Island Seafood Pty Ltd v Bryjed Pty Ltd [2002] FCA 983 cited Ciappina v Ciappina (1983) 70 FLR 287 cited Dranichnikov v Centrelink [2002] FCA 1622 cited Equity Access Ltd v Westpac Banking Corp (1989) ATPR 40-972 applied Lisa Joy Pty Ltd v Brothers Neilsen International Pty Ltd [2003] FCA 986 cited Livingspring Pty Ltd v Kliger Partners [2008] VSCA 93; (2008) 20 VR 377 considered Newtimber (Operations) Pty Ltd v Tarong Energy Corporation Ltd (No 2) [2011] FCA 123 applied Pathway Investments Pty Ltd v National Australia Bank Limited [2012] VSC 97 applied Save The Ridge Inc v Commonwealth of Australia [2004] FCA 1289 applied SZLZH v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2008] FCA 1163 cited T Sloyan and Sons (Builders) Ltd v Brothers of Christian Instruction [1974] 3 All ER 715 explained
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