Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Lanzer v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (No 2) [2021] FCA 1321 File number: NSD 1084 of 2021
Judgment of: NICHOLAS J
Date of judgment: 27 October 2021
Catchwords: COSTS – where applicants brought application for urgent interlocutory relief seeking injunction against the first respondent – where application dismissed on basis that applicants had failed to establish a prima facie case for relief sought – whether applicants should pay first respondent's costs of the interlocutory application Held: applicants ordered to pay first respondent's costs
Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 43
Cases cited: Athavle v State of New South Wales [2021] FCA 1075 Boyd v Wild Hibiscus Flower Company Pty Ltd (No 2) [2012] FCA 74 Brigthen Pty Limited v Nine Network Australia Pty Limited & Ors [2009] NSWSC 319 His Eminence Metropolitan Petar, Diocesan Bishop of the Macedonian Orthodox Church of Australia and New Zealand v the Macedonian Orthodox Community Church St Petka Incorporated & Anor (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 142 Lincoln Hunt Australia Pty Ltd v Willesee & Ors (1986) 4 NSWLR 457 Mayfield Family Wines Pty Ltd v Growers Wine Group Pty Ltd (No 2) [2021] SASC 75 Uren v Commonwealth of Australia (as represented by the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development) (No 2) [2017] FCA 759
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