Tolcher (as Liquidator of Lloyd Scott Enterprises Pty Ltd (In Liq) v Capital Finance Australia Ltd [2005] FCA 1300

The Court extended time for filing and service of the Notice of Motion, but refused leave to appeal because grounds for leave had not been shown, fragmentation of the proceeding was undesirable, and it was preferable that the matter proceed to a hearing.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 23 March 2005
Procedural Posture: Notice of Motion Seeking Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal and Extension of Time for Filing and Service of the Notice of Motion
Outcome: Time extended; application for leave to appeal otherwise dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics: ['leave to Appeal' 'extension of Time' 'federal Court Rules O 52 R 10(2 A)(b)' 'fragmentation of Proceedings']

['practice and Procedure'] ['leave to Appeal' 'extension of Time' 'federal Court Rules O 52 R 10(2 A)(b)' 'fragmentation of Proceedings']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion Seeking Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal and Extension of Time for Filing and Service of the Notice of Motion

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether time limited by O 52 r 10(2A)(b) of the Federal Court Rules for filing and service of the Notice of Motion should be extended.' 'Whether leave to appeal from the judgment delivered on 18 February 2005 should be granted.']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Time extended; application for leave to appeal otherwise dismissed with costs.

Orders

['The time limited by O 52 r 10 (2A)(b) of the Federal Court Rules for the filing and service of the Notice of Motion be extended up to and including 21 March 2005.' 'Subject to Order 1, the application is otherwise dismissed with costs.']