Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Pieman Resources Pty Ltd v Monks [2025] FCA 88 File number: QUD 397 of 2024
Judgment of: DERRINGTON J
Date of judgment: 30 January 2025
Date of Publication of Reasons: 17 February 2025
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – default judgment – contumacious non-performance of court orders – persistent delay – no explanation for non-performance of orders or delay – judgment given
Legislation: Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth)
Cases cited: Chamberlain Group, Inc v Giant Alarm System Co, Ltd (No 2) [2019] FCA 1606 Dye v Commonwealth Securities Limited [2010] FCA 720 Engineered Thermal Systems Pty Limited v Salmon, In the Matter of Salmon & Speck Pty Ltd (In Liq) [2012] FCA 1159 Fraser-Kirk v David Jones Limited (2010) 190 FCR 325 Hugo Boss AG v Hardge [2024] FCA 1325 Kumova v Davison (No 2) [2023] FCA 1 Lenijamar Pty Ltd v AGC (Advances) Limited (1990) 27 FCR 388 Maylord Equity Management Pty Ltd v Parazelsus Ltd [2014] FCA 979 Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs v AAM17 (2021) 272 CLR 329 Professional Administration Service Centres Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation (2012) 295 ALR 52 Speedo Holdings B.V. v Evans (No 2) [2011] FCA 1227 Spencer v Bamber [2012] NSWCA 274
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