Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Motorola Solutions, Inc. v Hytera Communications Corporation Ltd (Second Adjournment) [2020] FCA 987 File number: NSD 1283 of 2017
Judge: PERRAM J
Date of judgment: 13 July 2020
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – second application by Respondents to adjourn trial – where virtual trial proposed in circumstances of COVID-19 pandemic – where six of Respondents' witnesses located in China – where Chinese law submitted by Respondents to prevent witnesses giving evidence by video link – where Applicant proposes witnesses travel to Macau to give evidence – where Respondents request adjournment due to heightened risk of travel during pandemic, isolation requirements and potential inability and unwillingness of witnesses to travel – whether application premature
Legislation: Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) ss 63, 64, Dictionary Pt 2 cl 4 Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 1.33, 1.34, 29.09 Hague Convention on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters. Opened for signature 18 March 1970. 847 UNTS 231 (entered into force 7 October 1972)
Cases cited: Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67 Commonwealth v McLean (1996) 41 NSWLR 389 Haiye Developments Pty Ltd v The Commercial Business Centre Pty Ltd [2020] NSWSC 732 Motorola Solutions, Inc. v. Hytera Communications Corporation Ltd (Adjournment) [2020] FCA 539
Date of hearing: 9 July 2020
Registry: New South Wales
Division: General Division
National Practice Area: Intellectual Property
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