Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Dyer v Chrysanthou (No 2) (Injunction) [2021] FCA 641 File number: NSD 426 of 2021
Judgment of: THAWLEY J
Date of judgment: 27 May 2021
Date of publication of reasons: 11 June 2021
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for injunction to restrain counsel from acting for the Hon Charles Christian Porter in defamation proceedings – whether there is a real and sensible possibility of the misuse of confidential information – whether the proper administration of justice requires counsel be restrained from acting – whether any discretionary reasons for refusing relief – application allowed
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 23 Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) s 30
Cases cited: Brand v Monks [2009] NSWSC 1454 Carindale Country Club Estate Pty Ltd v Astill (1993) 42 FCR 307 Dealer Support Services Pty Ltd v Motor Trades Association of Australia Ltd (2014) 228 FCR 252 Farrow Mortgage Services Pty Ltd (in liq) v Mendall Properties Pty Ltd [1995] 1 VR 1 Geelong School Supplies Pty Ltd v Dean (2006) 237 ALR 612 Grant v Downs (1976) 135 CLR 674 Grimwade v Meagher [1995] 1 VR 446 Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298 Kallinicos v Hunt (2005) 64 NSWLR 561 Mumbin v Northern Territory of Australia (No 1) [2020] FCA 475 Nash v Timbercorp Finance Pty Ltd (2019) 137 ACSR 189 Sent v John Fairfax Publication Pty Ltd [2002] VSC 429 Spincode Pty Ltd v Look Software Pty Ltd (2001) 4 VR 501 Yunghanns v Elfic Pty Ltd (unreported, Supreme Court of Victoria, Gillard J, 16 July 1998)
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