Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Shaw v MAB Corporation Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 62 Citation: Shaw v MAB Corporation Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 62
Appeal from: Shaw v MAB Corporation Pty Ltd [2013] FCA 1231
Parties: JOHN SHAW v MAB CORPORATION PTY LTD, MAB DOCKLANDS PTY LTD, YARRANOVA PTY LTD, NEWQUAY STAGE 2 PTY LTD, ARNOLD BLOCH LEIBLER, ABL FIDUCIARY CORP PTY LTD, ABL & CO CUSTODIANS PTY LTD, MR ANTHONY CALVI, MR IAN MICHAEL SMITH and MR ALEXANDER WILLIAM KING
File number: VID 15 of 2014
Judge: MORTIMER J
Date of judgment: 17 February 2014
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for extension of time and leave to appeal summary judgment – extension of time granted – summary judgment ordered under both s 31A of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) and r 26.01 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – whether leave to appeal required – whether judgment of primary judge interlocutory in character – no real prospects of success on appeal – proceedings bringing administration of justice into disrepute – application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Legislation: Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ss 24, 31A Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) ss 51AA-51AC, 52, 53A Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 26.01, 35.13, 35.14, 36.03
Cases cited: Agar v Hyde (2000) 201 CLR 552; [2000] HCA 41 Ann Street Mezzanine Pty Ltd (in Liq) v Beck (2009) 175 FCR 532; [2009] FCA 333 Australian Education Union v Department of Education and Children's Services (2012) 248 CLR 1; [2012] HCA 3 Batistatos v Roads and Traffic Authority (NSW) (2006) 226 CLR 256; [2006] HCA 27 Budd v Secretary, Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs [2009] FCA 1138 Cement Australia Pty Ltd v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (2010) 187 FCR 261; [2010] FCAFC 101 Christanty v Secretary, Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs [2013] FCA 33 Croker v Philips Electronics Australia Ltd [2000] FCA 173 Décor Corporation Pty Ltd v Dart Industries Inc (1991) 33 FCR 397 Deighton v Telstra Corporation Ltd (Unreported, Federal Court of Australia, Lee, Heerey and RD Nicholson JJ, 17 October 1997) Eastman v Director of Public Prosecutions (ACT) (2003) 214 CLR 318; [2003] HCA 28 Egglishaw v Australian Crime Commission (2007) 164 FCR 224; [2007] FCAFC 183 Gallo v Dawson (1990) 93 ALR 479 Habib v Radio 2UE Sydney Pty Ltd [2009] NSWCA 231 Henderson v Henderson (1843) 3 Hare 100; 67 ER 313 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 Hunter v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police [1982] AC 529 Lin v Rail Corporation New South Wales [2011] FCA 546 Port of Melbourne Authority v Anshun Pty Ltd (1980) 147 CLR 35 Port of Melbourne Authority v Anshun Pty Ltd (1981) 147 CLR 589 Re Luck (2003) 203 ALR 1; [2003] HCA 70 Rigato Farms Pty Ltd v Ridolfi [2001] 2 Qd R 455; [2000] QCA 292 Samsung Electronics Co Ltd v Apple Inc [2013] FCAFC 138 Sharman License Holdings Ltd v Universal Music Aust Pty Ltd [2005] FCA 802 Shaw v MAB Corporation Pty Ltd [2013] FCA 1231 Shaw v Yarranova Pty Ltd [2006] VSC 45 Shaw v Yarranova Pty Ltd [2013] FCCA 1627 Spencer v Commonwealth (2010) 241 CLR 118; [2010] HCA 28 Wilson v Alexander (2003) 135 FCR 273
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