AFT Pharmaceuticals (AU) Pty Ltd v Reckitt Benckiser (Australia) Pty Ltd (No 2) [2020] FCA 1092

AFT Pharmaceuticals (AU) Pty Ltd v Reckitt Benckiser (Australia) Pty Ltd (No 2) [2020] FCA 1092

The Court determined there was no misapprehension of the facts or manner in which the applicant's argument was advanced, and the admission of representations was not qualified as claimed; accordingly, the application to re-open was refused with costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Application to Re Open Proceedings / Post Judgment, Pre Publication of Judgment
Outcome
Application to re-open refused with costs.
Legal Topics
['application to Re Open After Judgment' 'misapprehension of Facts' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'adequate Scientific Foundation' 'finality of Litigation']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application to Re Open Proceedings / Post Judgment, Pre Publication of Judgment

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court misapprehended the facts or manner of argument advanced by the applicant' 'Whether leave should be granted to re-open the matter after judgment but before publication']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court determined there was no misapprehension of the facts or manner in which the applicant's argument was advanced, and the admission of representations was not qualified as claimed; accordingly, the application to re-open was refused with costs.

Court Disposition

Application to re-open refused with costs.

Orders

  • ["The applicant's application for leave to re-open is refused with costs." 'The time for compliance with order 2 of the orders made on 21 May 2020 be extended to 18 August 2020.']