Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Le Breton v Pacific Mirage Limited [2012] FCA 505 Citation: Le Breton v Pacific Mirage Limited [2012] FCA 505
Parties: JUDITH ANNE LE BRETON v PACIFIC MIRAGE LIMITED ACN 010 585 967
File number(s): NSD 681 of 2012
Judge: YATES J
Date of judgment: 15 May 2012
Catchwords: CORPORATIONS – sufficiency of notice of extraordinary general meeting – whether notice misleading – whether injunction should be granted to restrain holding of meeting – balance of convenience
Legislation: Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)
Cases cited: Devereaux Holdings Pty Ltd v Pelsart Resources NL (No 2) (1985) 9 ACLR 956 Fraser v NRMA Holdings Limited (1995) 55 FCR 452 Samsung Electronics Co Ltd v Apple Inc (2011) 286 ALR 257
Date of hearing: 15 May 2012
Place: Sydney
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 23
Solicitor for the Plaintiff: Mr AD Price of Price & Company Solicitors
Counsel for the Defendant: Mr RD Marshall
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION NSD 681 of 2012
BETWEEN: JUDITH ANNE LE BRETON
Plaintiff
AND: PACIFIC MIRAGE LIMITED ACN 010 585 967
Defendant
JUDGE: YATES J DATE OF ORDER: 15 MAY 2012 WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT:
1. GRANTS leave to the plaintiff to file an originating process substantively in the form handed up, which I will sign and date, but amended so that it reads "originating process" and so that the parties are designated as "plaintiff" and "defendant". 2. NOTES the undertaking by the plaintiff's solicitor to pay the appropriate filing fee. 3. GRANTS leave to the plaintiff to proceed with her application for interlocutory relief at the present time. 4. GRANTS leave to the plaintiff to rely on the affidavit of Anthony David Price sworn 15 May 2012 in support of the application. 5. ORDERS that the plaintiff's application for interlocutory injunctive relief be dismissed. 6. ORDERS that the costs of the application for interlocutory relief be the defendant's costs in the cause. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
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