Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Protelight Pharmaceuticals (Australia) Pty Ltd v Wen [2024] FCA 581 File number(s): QUD 246 of 2024
Judgment of: COLLIER J
Date of judgment: 3 June 2024
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – ex parte application for freezing orders pursuant to rr 7.32 and 7.35 Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – affidavits filed by officer of applicant and lawyer – onus of proof – relevant criteria for satisfaction of Court in granting freezing order – "good arguable case" – danger that judgment will be unsatisfied in whole or in part – substituted service permitted
Legislation: Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) ss 181, 182, 1317H Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 45(2) Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 7.32, 7.35, 10.24, 10.49 Convention on The Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters 1965
Cases cited: Cardile v Led Builders Pty Ltd [1999] 198 CLR 380 Insolvency Guardian Melbourne Pty Ltd v Carlei [2016] FCA 72 National Australia Bank Ltd v Bond Brewing Holdings Ltd [1990] HCA 10; (1990) 169 CLR 271 Pickett v Amin [2023] VSC 715 PJM v AML [2018] QSC 187 Zhen v Mo [2008] VSC 300
Division: General Division
Registry: Queensland
National Practice Area: Other Federal Jurisdiction
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