Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Picos v Hyatt Hotel Canberra [2015] FCA 101 Citation: Picos v Hyatt Hotel Canberra [2015] FCA 101
Parties: CONNIE LOUISE PICOS v HYATT HOTEL CANBERRA
File number(s): NSD 23 of 2015
Judge(s): YATES J
Date of judgment: 19 February 2015
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application to strike out notice of address for service – application refused
Legislation: Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth) s 46PH Business Names Registration Act 2011 (Cth) Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) s 75 Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 9.51, 9.52 Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth)
Date of hearing: 19 February 2015
Place: Sydney
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 18
Counsel for the Applicant: The Applicant did not appear
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr M Orlov
Solicitor for the Respondent: Snedden Hall & Gallop Lawyers
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION NSD 23 of 2015
BETWEEN: CONNIE LOUISE PICOS
Applicant
AND: HYATT HOTEL CANBERRA
Respondent
JUDGE: YATES J DATE OF ORDER: 19 FEBRUARY 2015 WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The applicant's interlocutory application seeking an order that the notice of address for service filed by the respondent be struck out, be dismissed. 2. The applicant pay the respondent's costs. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
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