Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA Health Services Union v Asmar (No 2) [2024] FCA 1442 File number(s):
Judgment of: DOWLING J
Date of judgment: 13 December 2024
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for interlocutory relief – serious question to be tried previously established – whether serious question is now stronger – whether balance of convenience favours further interlocutory relief – application for interlocutory relief granted in part
Legislation: Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009 (Cth) s 323 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 23
Alumina and Bauxite Company Ltd v Queensland Alumina Ltd [2024] FCA 43 Australian Broadcasting Corporation v O'Neill [2006] HCA 46; 227 CLR 57 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Real Estate Institute of Western Australia Inc (1991) 161 ALR 79 Cases cited: Bullock v Federated Furnishing Trades Society of Australasia (1985) 5 FCR 464 Health Services Union v Asmar [2024] FCA 1168 Samsung Electronics Co Ltd v Apple Inc [2011] FCAFC 156; 217 FCR 238 Sigma Pharmaceuticals (Australia) Pty Ltd v Wyeth [2009] FCA 595; 81 IPR 339
Division: Fair Work
Registry: Victoria
National Practice Area: Employment and Industrial Relations
Number of paragraphs: 133
Date of hearing: 2 December 2024
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr M Harding SC and Mr J Fetter
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