Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Michell v Cvetkovic [2022] FCA 1295 File number: VID 16 of 2021
Judgment of: MCEVOY J
Date of judgment: 28 October 2022
Date of publication of reasons: 31 October 2022
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for default judgment pursuant to r 5.23(2)(c) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – where defendant has taken no active part in the proceeding – where defendant has failed to file notice of address for service or defence – defendant in default of appearance – plaintiffs entitled to relief in relation to insolvent trading claims alleged – relief granted.
Legislation: Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) ss 95A, 180-182, 286, 588E(4), 588G, 588M, 1317K Federal Court Act 1976 (Cth) s 51A Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 5.22, 5.23(2)(c)
Cases cited: Arthur v Vaupotic Investments Pty Ltd [2005] FCA 433 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Dataline.Net.Au Pty Ltd (2007) 161 FCR 513; [2007] FCAFC 146 Chamberlain Group Inc v Giant Alarm System Co Ltd (No 2) [2019] FCA 1606 Edenden v Bignall [2007] NSWSC 1122 Powell v Fryer (2001) 159 FLR 433; [2001] SASC 59 Speedo Holdings B.V. v Evans (No 2) [2011] FCA 1227 Yeo v Damos Earthmoving Pty Ltd, Re Beachwood Developments Pty Ltd (in liq) [2011] FCA 1129
Division: General Division
Registry: Victoria
National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations
Sub-area: Corporations and Corporate Insolvency
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