Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Abela v State of Victoria [2015] FCA 902 Citation: Abela v State of Victoria [2015] FCA 902
Appeal from: Abela v State of Victoria [2013] FCA 832
Parties: BEAU ABELA (BY HIS LITIGATION REPRESENTATIVE, PETER ABELA) v STATE OF VICTORIA (DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING)
File number: VID 950 of 2013
Judge: NORTH J
Date of judgment: 24 July 2015
Legislation: Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth), ss 5, 6, 22(2) Disability Standards for Education 2005 (Cth) Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), rr 1.34, 1.35, 9.70, 9.71
Cases cited: Jones v State of Victoria [2014] FCA 1404 Walker v State of Victoria (2011) 279 ALR 284; [2011] FCA 258
Date of hearing: 24 July 2015
Place: Melbourne
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: No Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 15
Counsel for the Appellant: Mr P Abela appeared on behalf of Beau Abela
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr J L Bourke QC
Solicitor for the Respondent: Minter Ellison
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION VID 950 of 2013
ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
BETWEEN: BEAU ABELA (BY HIS LITIGATION REPRESENTATIVE, PETER ABELA)
Appellant
AND: STATE OF VICTORIA (DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING)
Respondent
JUDGE: NORTH J DATE OF ORDER: 24 JULY 2015 WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. Pursuant to Rule 1.35 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) (the Rules), the Respondent be permitted under Rule 9.70 of the Rules to apply to the Court for approval of a deed of release between the Appellant and the Respondent dated 24 July 2015 that sought to compromise the appeal from the orders of Tracey J made 16 August 2013 (the Appeal) (the Compromise). 2. Pursuant to Rule 1.34, compliance with Rule 9.71(2)(c) of the Rules be dispensed with. 3. The settlement of the Appeal as set out in the Compromise is approved. 4. The annexures to the affidavit of Rory Jolley affirmed 21 July 2015 and the Compromise be treated on a confidential basis by being placed in a sealed enveloped marked "NOT TO BE OPENED WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF A JUDGE OF THIS COURT". 5. The Appeal be otherwise dismissed without adjudication of the merits. 6. There be no order as to 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