Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
De Pyle v Commonwealth of Australia (No 2) [2023] FCA 751 File number: QUD 375 of 2022
Judgment of: SARAH C DERRINGTON J
Date of judgment: 29 June 2023
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for stay of orders pending appeal – where appeal would be rendered nugatory if stay were not granted – where prejudice to national interest if orders were wrongly made but not stayed pending appeal
Cases cited: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v BMW (Australia) No 2 [2003] FCA 864 De Pyle v Commonwealth of Australia [2023] FCA 597 Hogan v Australian Crime Commission [2010] HCA 21; (2010) 240 CLR 651 Stefanovski v Digital Central Australia (Assets) Pty Ltd [2017] FCA 1121 Viagogo AG v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2021] FCA 175
Division: General Division
Registry: Queensland
National Practice Area: Administrative and Constitutional Law and Human Rights
Number of paragraphs: 17
Date of hearing: 29 June 2023
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr A Gregg
Solicitor for the Applicant: Bartley Cohen
Counsel for the Respondent: Ms F Rogers
Solicitor for the Respondent: Australian Government Solicitor
Counsel for the Intervener Mr D Sibtain SC
Solicitor for the Intervener ABC Legal
ORDERS QUD 375 of 2022
BETWEEN: DAMIEN DE PYLE Applicant
AND: COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Respondent
AUSTRALIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION Interested Party
order made by: SARAH C DERRINGTON J DATE OF ORDER: 29 JUNE 2023
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
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