Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Morad v El-Ashey (No 2) [2017] FCA 1612 File number: VID 536 of 2017
Judge: KENNY J
Date of judgment: 21 December 2017
Catchwords: COSTS – whether applicant should pay respondent's costs on an indemnity or party/party basis – party/party costs ordered.
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 (Cth) Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth)
Cases cited: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Universal Music Australia Pty Ltd (No 2) [2002] FCA 192; 201 ALR 618 Australian Guarantee Corp Ltd v De Jager [1984] VR 483 Brookfield Multiplex Limited v International Litigation Funding Partners Pty Ltd (No 4) [2009] FCA 803 Colgate-Palmolive Company v Cussons Pty Limited (1993) 46 FCR 225 Fountain Selected Meats (Sales) Pty Ltd v International Produce Merchants Pty Ltd (1988) 81 ALR 397 Fyna Foods Australia Pty Ltd v Cobannah Holdings Pty Ltd (No 2) [2004] FCA 1212 Gaffney v RSM Bird Cameron Partners (A Firm) (No 2) [2013] FCA 945 Hamod v State of New South Wales [2002] FCAFC 97; 188 ALR 659 Henke v Carter [2002] FCA 492 J-Corp Pty Ltd v Australian Builders Labourers Federated Union of Workers (WA Branch) (No 2) (1993) 46 IR 301 Jones v Bradley (No 2) [2003] NSWCA 258 Morad v El-Ashey [2017] FCA 1136 Ruddock v Vadarlis (No 2) [2001] FCA 1865; 115 FCR 229 Tetijo Holdings Pty Ltd v Keeprite Australia Pty Ltd [1991] FCA 225 Vasram v AMP Life Ltd [2002] FCA 1286 9
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