Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Bupa Australia Pty Ltd v iSelect (No 2) [2012] FCA 1277 Citation: Bupa Australia Pty Ltd v iSelect (No 2) [2012] FCA 1277
Parties: BUPA AUSTRALIA PTY LTD (ACN 000 057 590) v ISELECT LIMITED (ACN 124 302 932) and ISELECT HEALTH PTY LTD (ACN 088 749 955); ISELECT LIMITED (ACN 124 302 932) and ISELECT HEALTH PTY LTD (ACN 088 749 955); BUPA AUSTRALIA PTY LTD (ACN 000 057 590) and RICHARD BOWDEN
File number: VID 221 of 2012
Judges: DODDS-STREETON J
Date of judgment: 25 October 2012
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Application for joinder of parties and amendment of pleadings – whether arguable or affirmative case of accessorial liability against proposed parties – relevance of lack of particulars
Legislation: Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), r 9.05 Federal Court Rules 1979 (Cth), O 6 r 8
Cases cited: Brisbane Slipways Operations Pty Ltd v Pantaloni (2010) 270 ALR 13 considered Bupa Australia Pty Ltd v iSelect Limited (No 1) [2012] FCA 587 cited Comcare v John Holland Rail Pty Ltd [2009] FCA 660 considered General Steel Industries Inc v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) (1964) 112 CLR 125; [1965] ALR 636 cited Port of Melbourne Authority v Anshun Pty Ltd (1981) 147 CLR 589 cited Review Australia Pty Ltd v Redberry Enterprise Pty Ltd (2003) 58 IPR 366 considered Tytel Pty Ltd v Australian Telecommunications Commission (1988) 11 IPR 223 cited Warner Music Australia Ltd v Swiftel Communications Pty Ltd (2005) 67 IPR 27 cited Yorke v Lucas (1985) 158 CLR 661 cited
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