Gill v Ethicon Sarl (No 2) [2019] FCA 177

Gill v Ethicon Sarl (No 2) [2019] FCA 177

A 'hard closure' order extinguishing group member rights is neither necessary nor appropriate in the circumstances, particularly absent intention to settle the entire class action; only a 'soft' closure could facilitate settlement, and interlocutory application for 'hard closure' is dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Representative Proceedings/class Action / Interlocutory Application (dismissal)
Outcome
Interlocutory application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['class Closure Orders' 'group Member Rights' 'settlement Facilitation' 'costs in Class Actions']

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

Representative Proceedings/class Action / Interlocutory Application (dismissal)

  1. 1 ["Appropriateness of 'hard closure' orders in class actions" "Suitability of 'soft closure' orders for settlement facilitation" "Court's power to make class closure orders under s 33ZF" 'Costs associated with irrelevant/confidential material']

Ratio Decidendi

A 'hard closure' order extinguishing group member rights is neither necessary nor appropriate in the circumstances, particularly absent intention to settle the entire class action; only a 'soft' closure could facilitate settlement, and interlocutory application for 'hard closure' is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The interlocutory application by the respondents dated 12 December 2018 be dismissed.' "The respondents pay 75% of the applicants' costs of the application, those costs not to include costs of the preparation of the confidential affidavit of Rebecca Lee Jancauskas dated 30 January 2019 (which was not read)." "The...