Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Mohamed trading as Billan Family Day Care v Secretary, Department of Education, Skills & Employment [2020] FCA 900 File number: VID 374 of 2020
Judge: O'BRYAN J
Date of judgment: 25 June 2020
Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – purpose and scope of s 15 of the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) – principles governing the grant of a stay – whether an undertaking as to damages is required
Legislation: A New Tax System (Family Assistance) (Administration) Act 1999 (Cth) Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth)
Cases cited: Air Express Ltd v Ansett Transport Industries (Operations) Pty Ltd (1979) 146 CLR 249 Australian Broadcasting Corporation v O'Neill (2006) 227 CLR 57 Azaria Family Day Care Pty Ltd v Secretary, Department of Education and Training [2018] FCA 1640 Botany Bay City Council v Minister of State for Transport & Regional Development (1996) 90 LGERA 81 Cardile & Ors v LED Builders Pty Ltd (1999) 198 CLR 380 Century Metals and Mining NL v Yeomans (1988) 85 ALR 54 Galaxy Day Care Pty Ltd v Secretary, Department of Education and Training [2018] FCA 1549 Jackson v Sterling Industries Ltd (1987) 162 CLR 612 Patrick Stevedores Operations No 2 Pty Ltd v Maritime Union of Australia (No 3) (1998) 195 CLR 1 Perkins v Cuthill (1981) 52 FLR 236 Snow v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation (1987) 14 FCR 119
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