Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Re.Group Pty Ltd v Kazal (No 5) [2018] FCA 546 File number: NSD 2080 of 2016
Judge: PERRAM J
Date of judgment: 23 April 2018
Catchwords: CONTEMPT OF COURT – sentencing – whether civil or criminal contempt – whether contemnor's contempt was contumacious – whether fine or custodial sentence appropriate – whether assessment of fine should account for indemnity costs order – where respondent found guilty of three charges of breaching court order – where charges particularised to specific days
Legislation: Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) s 82(3) Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) s 4(2)
Cases cited: Australia Meat Industry Employees' Union v Mudginberri Station Pty Ltd (1986) 161 CLR 98 Construction, Forestry, Mining & Energy Union v BHP Steel (AIS) Pty Ltd [2003] FCAFC 13 Kazal v Thunder Studios Inc (California) [2017] FCAFC 111 Louis Vuitton Malletier SA v Design Elegance Pty Ltd [2006] FCA 83; 149 FCR 494 Matthews v ASIC [2009] NSWCA 155 Plastec Australia Pty Ltd v Plumbing Solutions and Services Pty Ltd (No 4) [2012] FCA 657 Re. Group Pty Ltd v Kazal (No 4) [2017] FCA 1084 Witham v Holloway (1995) 183 CLR 525
Date of hearing: 16 February 2018
Registry: New South Wales
Division: General Division
National Practice Area: Intellectual Property
Sub-area: Copyright and Industrial Designs
Category: Catchwords
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