Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Watson v Kriticos (Further Discovery and Adjournment) [2023] FCA 793 File number: NSD 970 of 2019
Judgment of: PERRAM J
Date of judgment: 14 July 2023
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for further discovery and adjournment of trial – whether reasonable grounds for being fairly certain that documents disclosing energy recycling mechanism in Second Respondent's surf machines exist
Legislation: Federal Court Rules 1979 (Cth) (repealed) O 15 r 8 Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 1.40(a), 14.1, 20.21
Cases cited: Basetec Services Pty Ltd v Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd (No 3) [2015] FCA 767 Beecham Group Ltd v Bristol Myers Co [1979] VR 273 British Association of Glass Bottle Manufacturers Ltd v Nettlefold [1912] AC 709 Edwards v Nine Network Australia Pty Ltd (No 2) [2022] FCA 1332 Fig Tree Developments Ltd v Australian Property Custodian Holdings Ltd [2008] FCA 1041 Guy Carpenter & Company Pty Ltd v Grove (No 2) [2011] FCA 1190 Metcash Trading Limited v Bunn [2010] FCA 8; 263 ALR 132 Norm Engineering Pty Ltd v Digga Australia Pty Ltd [2005] FCA 1378 Orient Overseas Container Line Ltd v ANL Singapore Pte Ltd [2020] FCA 921 Procter v Kalivis [2009] FCA 1518; 263 ALR 461 Shoreform (Qld) Pty Ltd v Millenium Coal Pty Ltd [2013] FCA 645 Voxson Pty Ltd v Telstra Corporation Limited (No 7) [2017] FCA 267 Voxson Pty Ltd v Telstra Corporation Limited (No 10) [2018] FCA 376; 134 IPR 99 Watson v Kriticos (Summary Judgment) [2021] FCA 261
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