Loevski v Australian Securities & Investment Commission [2001] FCA 1157

Loevski v Australian Securities & Investment Commission [2001] FCA 1157

The notice of appeal should be struck out as against the second respondent, as the proceedings before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal concerned only the actions of the first respondent and only the first respondent is a proper party to the appeal.

Parties
Applicant: Yakov Loevski; First Respondent: Australian Securities and Investments Commission; Second Respondent: Steven Sherman
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 December 2001
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Motion to Strike Out Part of Appeal
Outcome
Notice of appeal struck out as against the second respondent; applicant to pay the second respondent's costs.

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 Party arguments 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yakov Loevski

Applicant

Australian Securities and Investments Commission

First Respondent

Steven Sherman

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Motion to Strike Out Part of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the second respondent was a proper party to the appeal from the decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

Ratio Decidendi

The notice of appeal should be struck out as against the second respondent, as the proceedings before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal concerned only the actions of the first respondent and only the first respondent is a proper party to the appeal.

Court Disposition

Notice of appeal struck out as against the second respondent; applicant to pay the second respondent's costs.

Orders

  • The notice of appeal filed by the applicant on 9 November 2001 be struck out as against the second respondent.
  • The applicant pay the second respondent's costs of the application.