Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Sainsbury v Honourable Judge Salvatore Paul Vasta [2021] FCA 777 File number: ACD 57 of 2020
Judgment of: WIGNEY J
Date of judgment: 24 June 2021
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application seeking an order for separate hearings to determine questions of liability and damages under r 30.01 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – where ordinary course is for all issues to be determined together – whether Court should exercise its discretion to depart from ordinary course of hearing all issues of fact and law together – whether it is just and convenient for an order to be made for issues to be tried separately – consideration of the Court's overarching purpose of civil practice and procedure under s 37M of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) – consideration of the resolution of proceedings in a just, efficient, expeditious and economic manner – whether benefits outweighed risks of a separate hearing – where no good reason shown to depart from ordinary course – application declined
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), s 37M Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), r 30.01
Cases cited: Commissioner of Taxation v Hii (2014) 99 ATR 579; [2014] FCAFC 147 Dovuro Pty Limited v Wilkins (2003) 215 CLR 317; [2003] HCA 51 Energy Australia v Australian Energy Limited [2001] FCA 1049 Reading Australia Pty Ltd v Australian Mutual Provident Society (1999) 240 FCR 276; [1999] FCA 718 Tallglen Pty Ltd v Pay TV Holdings Pty Ltd (1996) 22 ACSR 130
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