BHP Group Limited v ImpiombatoCitation:[2022] HCA 33Before:Kiefel CJ, Gageler, Gordon, Edelman, Steward JJDate:12 Oct 2022Case Number:M12/2022Read more
The absence of an express territorial restriction in Pt IVA does not displace the presumption against extraterritoriality; therefore, claims cannot be brought on behalf of group members not resident in Australia.
- Parties
- Applicant: Unknown Applicant; Respondent: Unknown Respondent
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 12 October 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Statutory Interpretation / Judgment
- Outcome
- claims on behalf of non-resident group members not permitted
- Legal Topics
- Presumption Against Extraterritoriality, Representative Proceedings, Class Actions, Territorial Jurisdiction
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Unknown Applicant
Applicant
Unknown Respondent
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Statutory Interpretation / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Pt IVA of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) allows claims to be brought on behalf of group members not resident in Australia
- 2 Whether there is a presumption against extraterritoriality in the absence of express geographic restriction in Pt IVA
Ratio Decidendi
The absence of an express territorial restriction in Pt IVA does not displace the presumption against extraterritoriality; therefore, claims cannot be brought on behalf of group members not resident in Australia.
Court Disposition
claims on behalf of non-resident group members not permitted
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