Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Gislingham v Newhaven College Pty Ltd [2017] FCA 776 File numbers: VID 1315 of 2016 VID 162 of 2017
Judge: BROMBERG J
Date of judgment: 10 July 2017
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for approval of settlement under r 9.70 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – where the applicant is a minor with a disability – whether the settlement is in the best interests of the applicant – consideration of relevant factors, including the opinion of independent counsel – settlement approved
Legislation: Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) ss 236, 267 Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) ss 5, 6, 22 Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 9.61, 9.70, 9.71
Cases cited: Scandolera v State of Victoria [2015] FCA 1451 Wade v State of Victoria (No 2) [2012] FCA 1080
Date of hearing: Determined on the papers
Registry: Victoria
Division: General Division
National Practice Area: Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 13
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr D J Hancock
Solicitor for the Applicant: Arnold Thomas and Becker
Table of Corrections
20 July 2017 In paragraph 11, the word "Emma" has been replaced with "Jess" and the word "she" has been replaced with "he".
ORDERS VID 1315 of 2016
VID 162 of 2017
BETWEEN: JESS GISLINGHAM (BY HIS LITIGATION REPRESENTATIVE JOHN RATCLIFF) Applicant
AND: NEWHAVEN COLLEGE PTY LTD TRADING AS NEWHAVEN COLLEGE Respondent
JUDGE: BROMBERG J DATE OF ORDER: 10 JULY 2017
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