Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Barker v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2012] FCA 1076 Citation: Barker v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2012] FCA 1076
Parties: STEPHEN JOHN BARKER v COMMONWEALTH BANK OF AUSTRALIA
File number: SAD 187 of 2010
Judge: BESANKO J
Date of judgment: 3 October 2012
Corrigendum: 10 October 2012
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for a stay of execution of judgment pending determination of appeal – whether appropriate to exercise discretion to grant stay – balance of convenience – Rule 36.08 of Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth). Held: It is appropriate to grant a partial stay of the enforcement of the judgment.
Legislation: Federal Court Rules 2011 Rule 36.08,
Cases cited: Alexander v Cambridge Credit Corporation Ltd (1985) 2 NSWLR 685, cited Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v BMW (Australia) Limited (No 2) [2003] FCA 864, cited Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Myer Emporium Ltd (1986) 160 CLR 220, cited Henderson v Amadio Pty Ltd (No 3) (1996) 65 FCR 66, cited Hood Barrs v Crossman [1897] AC 172, cited Powerflex Services Pty Ltd and Ors v Data Access Corporation (1996) 35 IPR 193, cited Re Middle Harbour Investments ltd (in liq) (unreported, NSW Court of Appeal, 15 December 1976), cited TCN Channel 9 Pty Ltd v Antoniadis (No 20) (1999) 48 NSWLR 381, cited
Date of hearing: 26 September 2012
Place: Adelaide
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