Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Hasna v Crown Melbourne Limited [2021] FCA 1066 File number(s): VID 447 of 2021
Judgment of: MORTIMER J
Date of judgment: 3 September 2021
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – inspection of documents – inspection by non-party – genuine steps statement – leave not granted
Legislation: Access to Justice (Civil Litigation Reforms) Act 2009 (Cth) Civil Dispute Resolution Act 2011 (Cth) ss 6, 7, 17A Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ss 17, 37AE, 37M Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 2.32
Cases cited: Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Rich [2001] NSWSC 496; 51 NSWLR 643 Baptist Union of Queensland — Carinity v Roberts [2015] FCA 1068; 241 FCR 135 John Fairfax Publications Pty Ltd v Ryde Local Court [2005] NSWCA 101; 62 NSWLR 512 Oldham v Capgemini Australia Pty Ltd [2015] FCA 1149; 241 FCR 397
Division: General Division
Registry: Victoria
National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations
Sub-area: Regulator and Consumer Protection
Number of paragraphs: 29
Date of hearing: Determined on the papers
Solicitors for the applicant Seoud Solicitors
Solicitors for the respondent Allens
ORDERS VID 447 of 2021
BETWEEN: AHMED HASNA Applicant
AND: CROWN MELBOURNE LIMITED Respondent
order made by: MORTIMER J DATE OF ORDER: 3 September 2021
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The application for access to the respondent's genuine steps statement is refused. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
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