Legal Research
Cases
Abrahams v Milburn

Abrahams v Milburn

Case [2017] VCC 123

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

This content is currently unavailable.

Details

AGLC: Abrahams v Milburn [2017] VCC 123
Case: [2017] VCC 123
Decision Date: 24 February 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

AI summary not yet generated for this case.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Actions

Citations

Abrahams v Milburn [2017] VCC 123

Most Recent Citation

Fleet Partners v Salikin [2018] VCC 249

Cases Citing This Decision

Ezra Abrahams Pty Ltd v Milburn [2017] VSCA 355
Citation 1 (Para 1)

…case and an order striking out its proceeding on the basis that the respondent did not have a case to answer.[1] [1] Ezra Abrahams Pty Ltd v Milburn [2017] VCC 123 (‘Reasons’).…
Fleet Partners v Salikin [2018] VCC 249
Citation 2 (Para 34)

…A case may be reopened where it is in the interests of justice and procedural fairness: Ezra Abrahams Pty Ltd v Milburn [2017] VCC 123 at [46]. In Ezra Abrahams at [47], Judge Millane summarised four times when leave may be given to reopen a case: where fresh evidence, unavailable or not reasonably discoverable p…

Cases Cited

Statutory Material Cited

Spotlight Pty Ltd v NCON Australia Ltd [2012] VSCA 232
Citation 1

…rt Civil Procedure Rules 2008 Cases Cited: Inspector-General in Bankruptcy v Bradshaw [2006] FCA 22; Spotlight Pty Ltd v NCON Australia Ltd [2012] VSCA 232; Smith v New South Wales Bar Association [2002] 176 CLR; Goldsmith v Sandilands and Others [2002] HCA 31; Urban Transport Authority of NSW v Nweiser (1992) 28…
Inspector-General in Bankruptcy v Bradshaw [2006] FCA 22
Citation 2

…vidence Act 2008; Civil Procedure Act 2010; County Court Civil Procedure Rules 2008 Cases Cited: Inspector-General in Bankruptcy v Bradshaw [2006] FCA 22; Spotlight Pty Ltd v NCON Australia Ltd [2012] VSCA 232; Smith v New South Wales Bar Association [2002] 176 CLR; Goldsmith v Sandilands and Others [2002] HCA 3…
Goldsmith v Sandilands [2002] HCA 31
Citation 3

…ght Pty Ltd v NCON Australia Ltd [2012] VSCA 232; Smith v New South Wales Bar Association [2002] 176 CLR; Goldsmith v Sandilands and Others [2002] HCA 31; Urban Transport Authority of NSW v Nweiser (1992) 28 NSWLR 471; Henning v Lynch [1974] NSWLR 254; Mayne v The MTT (No 1) [1991] TASSC 81; Oakley v Insurance M…
Smith v New South Wales Bar Association [1992] HCA 36
Citation 4

…lication is made. For instance, in Smith v New South Wales Bar Association four Justices of the High Court said (omitting footnotes):[19] [19][1992] 176 CLR 256, 266-267, per Justices, Brennan, Dawson, Toohey and Gaudron…
Mayne v M T T (No 1) [1991] TASSC 81
Citation 5

…ers [2002] HCA 31; Urban Transport Authority of NSW v Nweiser (1992) 28 NSWLR 471; Henning v Lynch [1974] NSWLR 254; Mayne v The MTT (No 1) [1991] TASSC 81; Oakley v Insurance Manufacturers of Australia Pty Ltd [2008] VSC 68; Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298 Ruling: Leave to re-open plaintiff’s case to tender doc…
Jones v Dunkel [1959] HCA 9
Citation 6

…ning v Lynch [1974] NSWLR 254; Mayne v The MTT (No 1) [1991] TASSC 81; Oakley v Insurance Manufacturers of Australia Pty Ltd [2008] VSC 68; Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298 Ruling: Leave to re-open plaintiff’s case to tender documents refused. Defendant’s submission of no case to answer upheld.…
Jones v Dunkel [1959] HCA 8
Citation 7

…974] NSWLR 254; Mayne v The MTT (No 1) [1991] TASSC 81; Oakley v Insurance Manufacturers of Australia Pty Ltd [2008] VSC 68; Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298 Ruling: Leave to re-open plaintiff’s case to tender documents refused. Defendant’s submission of no case to answer upheld.…
Oakley v Insurance Manufacturers of Australia Pty Ltd [2008] VSC 68
Citation 8

…NSWLR 471; Henning v Lynch [1974] NSWLR 254; Mayne v The MTT (No 1) [1991] TASSC 81; Oakley v Insurance Manufacturers of Australia Pty Ltd [2008] VSC 68; Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298 Ruling: Leave to re-open plaintiff’s case to tender documents refused. Defendant’s submission of no case to answer upheld.…

AI Chat coming soon