Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Friar v Brown [2014] FCA 1275 Citation: Friar v Brown [2014] FCA 1275
Appeal from: D14-15\075 [2014] SCTA 223
Parties: CHINA MAY FRIAR v MARIAN PATRICIA BROWN (ON BEHALF OF LIAM FRIAR), MARIAN PATRICIA BROWN (ON BEHALF OF CARMICHAEL FRIAR) and AMANDA CHANCELLOR (ACTING ON BEHALF OF JYDEN BRUMMELL)
File number(s): NSD 1146 of 2014 NSD 1147 of 2014
Judge(s): GRIFFITHS J
Date of judgment: 25 November 2014
Catchwords: SUPERANNUATION – review of decision of Superannuation Complaints Tribunal – appellant self-represented – whether Tribunal should be joined as respondent to proceedings – whether substituted service permitted.
Legislation: Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 10.24 Superannuation (Resolution of Complaints) Act 1993 (Cth) s 45
Date of hearing: 25 November 2014
Place: Sydney
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 10
Counsel for the appellant: The appellant appeared in person
Counsel for the respondents: The respondents did not appear
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION NSD 1146 of 2014 NSD 1147 of 2014
ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPERANNUATION COMPLAINTS TRIBUNAL
BETWEEN: CHINA MAY FRIAR
Appellant
AND: MARIAN PATRICIA BROWN (ON BEHALF OF LIAM FRIAR)
First Respondent
MARIAN PATRICIA BROWN (ON BEHALF OF CARMICHAEL FRIAR)
Second Respondent
AMANDA CHANCELLOR (ACTING ON BEHALF OF JYDEN BRUMMELL)
Third Respondent
JUDGE: GRIFFITHS J DATE OF ORDER: 25 NOVEMBER 2014 WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
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