Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Basetec Services Pty Ltd v CPB Contractors Pty Ltd (formerly Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd) [2017] FCA 510 File numbers: SAD 27 of 2017 SAD 84 of 2014
Judge: WHITE J
Date of judgment: 27 April 2017
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application by two persons who are not lawyers to represent a company Held: application refused, but the first person is entitled to represent himself in his personal capacity in relation to the application to vary an injunction by which he is bound.
Legislation: Australian Consumer Law (Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth), Sch 2) s 18 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 37M Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 1.34, 4.01(2)
Cases cited: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Adata (Vic) Pty Ltd (No 2) [2015] FCA 272 Basetec Services Pty Ltd v Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd (No 2) [2015] FCA 672; (2015) 236 FCR 432 Basetec Services Pty Ltd v Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd (No 7) [2016] FCA 1587 Basetec Services Pty Ltd v Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd (No 6) [2016] FCA 1534 Damjanovic v Maley (2002) 55 NSWLR 149 Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Compumark Pty Ltd [2012] FCA 583 Pacific Air Freighters (Qld) Pty Ltd v Toller [2000] FCA 0343; (2000) 171 ALR 519 Pharm-a-Care Laboratories Pty Ltd v The Commonwealth (No 12) [2012] FCA 289 Termi-Mesh Australia Pty Ltd v Josu Manufacturing Pty Ltd [1999] FCA 1241 Worldwide Enterprises Pty Ltd v Silberman [2009] VSC 165
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