Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd v Coretell Pty Ltd (No 6) [2013] FCA 1025 Citation: Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd v Coretell Pty Ltd (No 6) [2013] FCA 1025
Parties: AUSTRALIAN MUD COMPANY PTY LTD (ACN 009 283 416), IMDEX LIMITED (ACN 008 947 813) and REFLEX INSTRUMENTS ASIA PACIFIC PTY LTD (ACN 124 204 191) v CORETELL PTY LTD (ACN 119 188 493) and MINCREST HOLDINGS PTY LTD (TRADING AS CAMTEQ INSTRUMENTS SERVICES) (ACN 068 672 471)
File number: WAD 132 of 2007
Judge: BARKER J
Date of judgment: 7 October 2013
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – interlocutory application for security for costs – whether Court has power to order security for costs against a cross-applicant – discretionary issues bearing upon whether security should be ordered
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 56 Patents Act 1990 (Cth) s 128
Cases cited: Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd v Coretell Pty Ltd [2010] FCA 1169; (2010) 88 IPR 270 Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd v Coretell Pty Ltd [2011] FCAFC 121; (2011) 93 IPR 188 Kelly v Willmott Forests Ltd (in liquidation) [2012] FCA 1446; (2012) 300 ALR 675 Lewis v WD & VJ Hambley Pty Ltd (unreported, French J, 13 November 1987) Madgwick v Kelly [2013] FCAFC 61; (2013) 212 FCR 1
Date of hearing: 2 October 2013
Place: Perth
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 47
Counsel for the Applicants: Mr J Hennessy SC
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