Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Puxty v Monarch Advisory Group Pty Ltd [2022] FCA 153 Appeal from: Monarch Advisory Group Pty Ltd v Puxty (No 2) [2021] FCA 801
File number: NSD 779 of 2021
Judgment of: THAWLEY J
Date of judgment: 25 February 2022
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for extension of time to seek leave to appeal from interlocutory decision – where application filed 24 minutes out of time – extension of time granted – insufficient prospect of grounds contained in draft notice of appeal leading to primary judge's order being set aside to warrant granting leave to appeal – leave to appeal refused
Legislation: Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) ss 181(1), 182(1), 183(1), 1317H Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) Sch 2 (Australian Consumer Law) ss 18, 31, 236 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 24(1A)
Cases cited: Monarch Advisory Group Pty Ltd v Puxty [2021] FCA 341 Monarch Advisory Group Pty Ltd v Puxty (No 2) [2021] FCA 801 Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67 Décor Corporation Pty Ltd v Dart Industries Inc [1991] FCA 844; (1991) 33 FCR 397 Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298
Division: General Division
Registry: New South Wales
National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations
Sub-area: Regulator and Consumer Protection
Number of paragraphs: 55
Date of last submissions: 25 October 2021 (Applicant) 15 October 2021 (Respondent)
Date of hearing: Determined on the papers
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr M Luitingh
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