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.
Procedural Posture
Representative Proceedings/class Action / Interlocutory Application (dismissal)
Legal Issues
- 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...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment