Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Ferguson v Dallow (No 2) [2021] FCA 152 File number: TAD 31 of 2020
Judgment of: WHITE J
Date of judgment: 19 February 2021
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for default judgment pursuant to r 5.23 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – the First Respondent defaulted by not filing a defence within the time ordered by the Court – application granted.
Legislation: Australian Consumer Law s 18 Competition and Consumer Act (2010) (Cth) Federal Court Rules (2011) (Cth) rr 5.22, 5.23, 16.07(2)
Cases cited: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Dataline.Net.Au Pty Ltd [2006] FCA 1427; (2006) 235 ALR 665 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Dataline.Net.Au Pty Ltd [2007] FCAFC 146; (2007) 161 FCR 513 Chamberlain Group Inc v Giant Alarm System Co Ltd [2019] FCA 1606 Sampson (Trustee) v Taboada [2016] FCA 926 Sony Corporation v Costaneo [2012] FCA 153
Division: General Division
Registry: Tasmania
National Practice Area: Other Federal Jurisdiction
Number of paragraphs: 22
Date of hearing: 19 February 2021
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr C Gunson SC
Solicitor for the Applicant: Page Seager Lawyers
Counsel for the Respondents: The First Respondent appeared in person
Counsel for the Respondents: The Second Respondent did not appear
Table of Corrections
15 March 2021 In the third sentence of paragraph 7, the first mentioned word "applicant" be replaced with "first respondent".
ORDERS TAD 31 of 2020
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