NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Cadbury Pty Ltd v Mercer Investment Nominees Ltd [2010] NSWSC 385
HEARING DATE(S) : 8 April 2010
JUDGMENT DATE : 4 May 2010
JURISDICTION : Equity
JUDGMENT OF : Tamberlin AJ
DECISION : There should be determination of the separate preliminary questions.
CATCHWORDS : PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – Uniform Civil Procedure Rules, r 28.2 – separate decision of questions – order for decision – whether questions arising in the proceedings should be determined in advance of proceedings - PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – contract of employment – application for separate determination of questions in proceedings – whether further evidence will assist in determination of clause of contract – determination will save time and cost.
LEGISLATION CITED : Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 28.2 Companies Act 1985 (UK)
CATEGORY : Separate question
CBS Productions Pty Ltd v O'Neill (1985) 1 NSWLR 601 Franklins Pty Ltd v Metcash Trading [2009] NSWCA 407 CASES CITED : Franklins Pty Ltd v Metcash Trading Pty Ltd [2009] NSWCA 407 IATA v Ansett Aust Holdings Ltd (2008) 234 CLR 151 Integral Home Loans Pty Ltd v Interstar Wholesale Finance Pty Ltd [2006] NSWSC 1464 Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board (2001) 206 CLR 1
Cadbury Pty Limited (P) Mercer Investment Nominees Limited (D1) Luke Mulkearns (D2) Joe Ferraro (D3) PARTIES : Rodney John McNeil (D4) Michael Keenan (D5) Andrew Nowicki (D6) Patricia Fields (D7) Michael Magee (D8)
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