Actions
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Statutory Material Cited
0
-
Unilever Australia Limited v Rosella Foods Pty Limited
[2012] NSWDC 221
Citation 1
(Para 80)
…nt, it is carrying out a function of the Court, not taking a step in a proceeding as a person: Unilever Australia Ltd v Rosella Foods Pty Ltd [2012] NSWDC 221 at [80]-[81]; Sovereign MF Ltd v Compliance and Risk Services Pty Ltd [2013] VSC 213 at [9]. There are arguments to the contrary (that leave is required in t…
-
Hometeam Constructions Pty Ltd v McCauley
[2005] NSWCA 303
Citation 2
…act did not provide for Show Cause Notice to require work to be completed – whether cause was shown – Hometeam Constructions Pty Ltd v McCauley [2005] NSWCA 303 – Brenmar Building Co Pty Ltd v The University of Newcastle (1999) 15 BCL 467 – Re Stewardson Stubbs v Collet Pty Ltd & Bankstown Municipal Council [1965]…
-
Neil v Nott
[1994] HCA 23
Citation 3
…of endeavouring to ascertain the rights of parties which are obfuscated by their own advocacy: see the High Court’s comments in Neil v Nott (1994) 68 ALJR 509 at 510. This does not mean that the proceeding lost its adversarial quality in any way. The Court does not have a duty to run its case for Obsidian: see Croft…
-
Raptis v City of Melbourne
[2017] VSC 488
Citation 4
(Para 15)
…its adversarial quality in any way. The Court does not have a duty to run its case for Obsidian: see Croft J in Raptis v City of Melbourne [2017] VSC 488 at [15]. The evidence 23The documents in evidence in this case were recorded in an agreed list of documents, from the Court Book, and marked Exhibit A. Two oth…
-
Sovereign MF Limited v Compliance and Risk Services Pty Ltd
[2013] VSC 213
Citation 5
(Para 9)
…person: Unilever Australia Ltd v Rosella Foods Pty Ltd [2012] NSWDC 221 at [80]-[81]; Sovereign MF Ltd v Compliance and Risk Services Pty Ltd [2013] VSC 213 at [9]. There are arguments to the contrary (that leave is required in these circumstances). If either the plaintiff or liquidator considers that leave is re…