Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Raytheon Corporation v Lockheed Martin Corporation [2012] FCA 878 Citation: Raytheon Corporation v Lockheed Martin Corporation [2012] FCA 878
Parties: RAYTHEON CORPORATION v LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION
File number: WAD 161 of 2012
Judge: GILMOUR J
Date of judgment: 15 August 2012
Legislation: National Security Information (Criminal and Civil Proceedings) Act 2004 (Cth) s 6A
Cases cited: Australian Retailers Association v Reserve Bank of Australia (2005) 148 FCR 446
Date of hearing: 15 August 2012
Place: Perth
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: No catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 7
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr D Stewart
Solicitor for the Applicant: Wrays
Counsel for the Respondent: Ms S Marks SC with Ms F Marks
Solicitor for the Respondent: Logie-Smith Lanyon Lawyers
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION WAD 161 of 2012
BETWEEN: RAYTHEON CORPORATION
Applicant
AND: LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION
Respondent
JUDGE: GILMOUR J DATE OF ORDER: 15 AUGUST 2012 WHERE MADE: PERTH
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The applicant's interlocutory application for an adjournment be dismissed. 2. The applicant pay the respondent's costs of the interlocutory application, to be taxed if not agreed. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION WAD 161 of 2012
BETWEEN: RAYTHEON CORPORATION
Applicant
AND: LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION
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