Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia Kaplan v State of Victoria (No 6) [2022] FCA 1048 File number(s): VID 391 of 2021
Judgment of: MORTIMER J
Date of judgment: 7 September 2022
Catchwords: EVIDENCE – application by applicants to call further witness – whether evidence is responsive to respondents' evidence – application refused
Cases cited: Kaplan v State of Victoria (No 5) [2022] FCA 909
Division: General Division
Registry: Victoria
National Practice Area: Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights
Number of paragraphs: 16
Date of last submission/s: 24 August 2022
Date of hearing: Determined on the papers
Counsel for the Applicants: Mr A Butt with Mr C Dawlings and Mr A Marcou
Solicitor for the Applicants: Cornwalls
Counsel for the Respondents: Mr C Young QC with Mr T Jeffrie and Mr B House
Solicitor for the Respondents: MinterEllison
ORDERS VID 391 of 2021
BETWEEN: JOEL KAPLAN First Applicant
JANET ABADEE AS REPRESENTATIVE OF MATT KAPLAN, A MINOR Second Applicant
SARIT COHEN AS REPRESENTATIVE OF GUY COHEN, A MINOR (and others named in the Schedule) Third Applicant
AND: STATE OF VICTORIA First Respondent
RICHARD MINACK Second Respondent
PAUL VARNEY Third Respondent
DEMI FLESSA Fourth Respondent
order made by: MORTIMER J DATE OF ORDER: 7 September 2022
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The application to call Cooper Andronaco as a witness in this proceeding on behalf of the applicants is refused. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
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