Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Diab Pty Ltd v Yum! Restaurants Australia Pty Ltd (No 2) [2017] FCA 54 File number: NSD 832 of 2014
Judge: BROMWICH J
Date of judgment: 3 February 2017
Catchwords: COSTS – application by a third party to proceedings for costs of compliance with a subpoena – where application was made almost two years after subpoena discharged – where application was made months after delivery of judgment in the substantive proceedings – where applicant for costs of compliance withheld itemised invoices for a significant period of time – where applicant's itemised invoices when provided revealed concerns as to appropriateness and reasonableness of costs incurred – held: application dismissed
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), ss 37M(1)(b), 37M(2)(d), 37M(2)(e), 37N(1), 37N(2), 37N(4) Federal Court Rules, O 27 rr 4A, 11 Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), rr 24.22
Cases cited: Bank of New South Wales v Withers (1981) 52 FLR 207; (1981) 35 ALR 21 Deposit & Investment Co Ltd (Receivers Appointed) v Peat Marwick Mitchell & Co (1996) 39 NSWLR 267 Diab Pty Ltd v YUM! Restaurants Australia Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 43 Fuelexpress Ltd v LM Ericsson Pty Ltd (1987) 75 ALR 284 Taylor v Dixon Advisory Ltd (2010) 5 ACTLR 136 Westpac Banking Corporation v Australian Securities Commission (1997) 72 FCR 318
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