Yates Property Corporation Pty Ltd v Boland, John as representative of Abbot Tout Russell Kennedy Solicitors & Ors [1998] FCA 1605

Yates Property Corporation Pty Ltd v Boland, John as representative of Abbot Tout Russell Kennedy Solicitors & Ors [1998] FCA 1605

Orders 2 and 6, read with the reasons for judgment, operated only as between Yates Property Corporation Pty Ltd and the first and third respondents, but were varied because the parties agreed to clarifying insertions. Order 3 was properly varied under O 35 r 7(3) because it affected the second respondent although...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 November 1998
Procedural Posture
Appeal From a Judge of the Federal Court of Australia; Motion by the Second Respondent to Vary Orders / Post Judgment Motion to Correct or Vary Orders Made on 5 August 1998 and Entered on 12 August 1998
Outcome
Orders 2, 3 and 6 made on 5 August 1998 and entered on 12 August 1998 were varied pursuant to O 35 r 7(3) the Federal Court Rules; the orders were not to be entered before the expiry of fourteen days.
Legal Topics
['variation of Court Orders' 'interpretation of Orders by Reference to Reasons' 'costs Orders' 'security for Costs' 'remittal for Assessment of Damages']
['civil Procedure' 'appellate Procedure'] ['variation of Court Orders' 'interpretation of Orders by Reference to Reasons' 'costs Orders' 'security for Costs' 'remittal for Assessment of Damages']

Source-derived case record

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 From a Judge of the Federal Court of Australia; Motion by the Second Respondent to Vary Orders / Post Judgment Motion to Correct or Vary Orders Made on 5 August 1998 and Entered on 12 August 1998

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether orders 2, 3 and 6 made on 5 August 1998 required correction or variation.' 'Whether, in interpreting an order, the Court should refer to the reasons for making the order as part of the context.' 'Whether order 3 incorrectly affected the second respondent despite there being no appeal against costs orders made in his favour.']

Ratio Decidendi

Orders 2 and 6, read with the reasons for judgment, operated only as between Yates Property Corporation Pty Ltd and the first and third respondents, but were varied because the parties agreed to clarifying insertions. Order 3 was properly varied under O 35 r 7(3) because it affected the second respondent although there had been no appeal against the costs orders made by the primary judge in the second respondent's favour.

Court Disposition

Orders 2, 3 and 6 made on 5 August 1998 and entered on 12 August 1998 were varied pursuant to O 35 r 7(3) the Federal Court Rules; the orders were not to be entered before the expiry of fourteen days.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to O 35 r 7(3) the Federal Court Rules, orders 2, 3 and 6 made on 5 August 1998 and entered on 12 August 1998 in respect of appeals number NG 495 of 1997, NG 716 of 1997 and NG 717 of 1997 be varied so as to be in the form set out below:' 'The order made by Branson J on 5 June 1997 in so far as it relates...