Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Gill v Ethicon Sàrl (No 2) [2019] FCA 177 File number: NSD 1590 of 2012
Judge: LEE J
Date of judgment: 4 February 2019
Catchwords: REPRESENTATIVE PROCEEDINGS – application for "hard closure" of the class – appropriateness of "hard closure" orders – possibility of "soft closure" – likelihood of settlement offer being made to resolve whole of proceedings prior to judgment being delivered – interlocutory application dismissed – filing of large amounts of irrelevant material relevant to costs order
Legislation: Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) s 131 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) Pt VB, s 33V, s 33Z(1)(f), s 33ZF
Cases cited: Courtney v Medtel Pty Limited [2002] FCA 957; (2002) 122 FCR 168 Dillon v RBS Group (Australia) Pty Limited [2017] FCA 896; (2017) 252 FCR 150 Ethicon Sàrl v Gill [2018] FCAFC 137 Jones v Treasury Wine Estates Limited (No 2) [2017] FCA 296 McMullin v ICA Operations Pty Ltd (1998) 84 FCR 1 Melbourne City Investments Pty Ltd v Treasury Wine Estates Limited [2017] FCAFC 98; (2017) 252 FCR 1 Money Max Int Pty Ltd (Trustee) v QBE Insurance Group Limited [2016] FCAFC 148; (2016) 245 FCR 191 Regent Holdings Pty Ltd v State of Victoria [2012] VSCA 221; (2012) 36 VR 424 Morabito, V, "Judicial Responses to Class Action Settlements that Provide no Benefits to some Class Members" (2006) 32 Monash University Law Review 75
Date of hearing: 4 February 2019
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