Chapman v Luminis Pty Ltd [2002] FCAFC 343

Chapman v Luminis Pty Ltd [2002] FCAFC 343

The Court directed that clarification by the appellants was required as to the basis for relying on restricted material, that access procedures should be followed as discussed, the restricted aspect of the appeal would be presented after other submissions, and an application for leave to intervene by Dr Kartinyeri is stood over with liberty to restore.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 November 2002
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Directions Hearing (preparatory to Full Appeal Hearing)
Outcome
Application stood over; liberty reserved to restore at conclusion of other arguments.
Legal Topics
[]
[]

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

Appeal / Directions Hearing (preparatory to Full Appeal Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether appellant's counsel should have access to restricted material at this stage" 'Whether Dr D Kartinyeri should be granted leave to intervene on the first issue']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court directed that clarification by the appellants was required as to the basis for relying on restricted material, that access procedures should be followed as discussed, the restricted aspect of the appeal would be presented after other submissions, and an application for leave to intervene by Dr Kartinyeri is stood over with liberty to restore.

Court Disposition

Application stood over; liberty reserved to restore at conclusion of other arguments.

Orders

  • ['The application be stood over, reserving liberty to restore the application at the conclusion of argument on the other aspects of the appeal.']