INDUSTRIAL LAW – penalty determination – where respondents failed to consult with applicant prior to amending the procedure for recording live work on or near the low voltage network and failed to establish a Safety Committee in contravention of enterprise agreement, s 50 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) and ss 47(1) and 47(2) Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (ACT) – where respondents admit to contraventions – where parties have submitted agreed range of civil penalty – consideration of appropriate penalty where not all facts are agreed – discretionary factors to be taken into account where an appropriate range is agreed
↧
Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Jemena Networks (ACT) Pty Ltd [2025] FCA 203
↧
1297 KRL McMillans Pty Ltd v Whizmo Creates Pty Ltd, in the matter of 1297 KRL McMillans Pty Ltd (in liq) [2025] FCA 209
CORPORATIONS – where liquidators sought orders pursuant to s 588FF of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) – where company is presumed insolvent – failure to keep financial records pursuant to 286(2) of the Corporations Act – payment of sums of money from insolvent company to third parties – payments were voidable transactions, insolvent transactions and uncommercial transactions
↧
↧
Edser v QSuper Board [2025] FCA 212
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – interlocutory application for security for costs against appellant – no appearance by appellant – potential request for adjournment refused – ex parte hearing of application – principles for granting order for security for costs – where grounds of appeal identify no error in reasoning of primary Judge – where limited evidence of appellant’s financial position – where unclear whether security for costs order would stifle appeal – where costs assessment undertaken by experienced costs specialist – where costs assessment and costs sought by respondent reasonable in the circumstances – security for costs order made against appellant –Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 56 and Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 36.09
↧
Australian Securities and Investments Commission v LGSS Pty Ltd (No 3) [2025] FCA 205
BANKING AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS – imposition of civil penalties following findings and declarations of breach of ss 12DB(1)(a) and 12DF(1) of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 (Cth) (the ASIC Act) – whether by reference to s 12GBB(5)(e) of the ASIC Act any penalty imposed on a defendant superannuation trustee should be fixed by reference to an amount that ensures that there is no direct, negative impact on the members of the superannuation fund – nature of the harms caused by “greenwashing” – where parties were poles apart on proposed penalty – total penalty imposed of $10.5 million – adverse publicity order made under s 12GLB of the ASIC Act – rationale for such orders discussed
↧
Mbuzi v Curnow (Registrar) [2025] FCA 213
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW — Application for judicial review of a Registrar’s decision under r 2.26 and r 2.27(b) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) to refuse to accept documents for filing — Where the Registrar decided that the Applicant’s original application and accompanying documents were an abuse of process, frivolous, and vexatious — Whether the Registrar’s decision was affected by jurisdictional error — Whether there was reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of the Registrar — Whether the Registrar’s decision was legally unreasonable — Application dismissed.
↧
↧
Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union v Qube Ports Pty Ltd [2025] FCA 208
INDUSTRIAL LAW – declaratory relief under s 545 and pecuniary penalties under s 546 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) – multiple breaches of obligations to provide training under enterprise agreements – multiple contraventions of s 50 of the Act – course of conduct under s 547 of the Act – principles applicable to pecuniary penalties – application of criminal law sentencing principles – single course of conduct principle – totality principle
↧
Krejci, in the matter of Sydney Exotic Aquariums Casula Pty Ltd (in liq) (No 2) [2025] FCA 211
COSTS – examinee failed to attend Court in answer to an examination summons without reasonable cause – where arrest warrant to issue the next day absent further evidence of a reasonable excuse or attendance– application for indemnity costs fixed on a gross lump sum basis – whether special circumstances justify indemnity costs – whether liquidator engaged in disentitling conduct– whether application for indemnity costs procedurally fair– whether liquidator entitled to costs thrown away
↧
Commissioner of Taxation v Zou (No 3) [2025] FCA 216
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application to vary freezing orders – where respondent taxpayer required to give security for tax-related liability – where Deputy Commissioner of Taxation obtained judgment against taxpayer for tax-related liability – where Commissioner of Taxation sought to enforce judgment debt against real estate owned by taxpayer – where freezing orders restrained Registrar of Titles from registering dealings affecting the property – whether freezing orders should be varied to allow registration of transfer arising from seizure and sale of property by sheriff – application granted
↧
Hams (Administrator), in the matter of Onesteel Manufacturing Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed) [2025] FCA 219
CORPORATIONS – proposed extension of convening period for second meeting of creditors under s 439A of the Corporations Act 2001(Cth) – complex administration – convening period extended
↧
↧
Vehicle Monitoring Systems Pty Limited v SARB Management Group Pty Ltd trading as Database Consultants Australia (No 12) [2025] FCA 210
COSTS – costs of interlocutory application – costs reserved after hearing – whether interlocutory application was dominant reason for vacation of final hearing dates – effect of delay in making interlocutory application – each party to bear own costs.
↧
Firstmac Limited v Zip Co Limited [2025] FCAFC 30
TRADE MARKS – appeal against decision that composite marks not deceptively similar to registered trade mark pursuant to s 120 of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) (TM Act) – whether stylised marks containing the registered trade mark and other words deceptively similar – appeal against decision to uphold defences against trade mark infringement of honest concurrent use under s 122(1)(f) and (fa) of the TM Act and use of own name in good faith s 122(1)(a) – whether respondents acted honestly in use of the mark – appeal against decision to order removal of the appellant’s registered trade mark from the Register of Trade Marks pursuant to s 92(1) and s 92(4)(b) of the TM Act – whether the appellant did not during the relevant non-use period use its registered trade mark in good faith in relation to its services – appeal against decision to order rectification of the Register by cancelling the appellant’s registered trade mark under s 88(1) and 88(2)(c)of the TM Act – whether discretion to not to order removal from the Register exercised in error
HELD: Appeal allowed – primary judge erred by finding that stylised composite marks contained the form of the registered mark and another word were not deceptively similar to registered trade mark – defence of honest concurrent use and use of own name in good faith not made out due to honesty not being proven – appellant demonstrated use during the relevant non-use period – trade mark not to be removed from Register – primary judge erred in exercising discretion to cancel appellant’s mark as no blameworthy conduct on part of appellant leading to any confusion caused by appellant’s use of its own mark – trade mark not to be cancelled
↧
AJD20 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2025] FCA 227
MIGRATION – application to extend time to appeal from a decision of the (then) Federal Circuit Court of Australia – applicant did not appear – application dismissed
↧
Lehrmann v Network Ten Pty Limited (Reference Costs) [2025] FCA 225
COSTS – residuum of the dispute regarding the scope of indemnity required to be provided by Network Ten to Ms Wilkinson – where remaining dispute concerns costs of the reference conducted by a referee pursuant to an order of the Court – where the applicable legal principles concerning costs considered – where the reasonableness of the approach taken by each party to resolving the dispute as to costs of the reference considered – where each party should bear their own costs of the reference – where this result best promotes the overarching purpose and recognises neither party acted unreasonably – no order made as to costs CONSTITUTIONAL LAW – judicial power of the Commonwealth – Constitution, Ch III – observations as to why a referee appointed under s 54A of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) does not impermissibly exercise the judicial power of the Commonwealth
↧
↧
Special Gold Pty Ltd (in liq) v Dyldam Developments Pty Ltd (subject to a Deed of Company Arrangement) [2025] FCA 226
CORPORATIONS – application for orders under ss 477(2B) and 1323(3) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and s 37AI of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) – where there is nothing to suggest that entry into the agreements by the liquidator would be ill-advised or improper – where disclosure of the agreements to one or more of the defendants could undermine the successful pursuit of the claims and cause prejudice to the interests of the company’s creditors – where asset preservation orders shown to be necessary to protect the position of the plaintiff in the pursuit of its claims by seeking to ensure that any judgment that it may obtain can be satisfied – orders made
↧
Shute (Liquidator), in the matter of Modliv Pty Ltd (in liq) [2025] FCA 224
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for the issue of an arrest warrant – where summons issued by the Court under s 596A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) requiring a director of a company to attend an examination about the company’s examinable affairs – where director failed to attend examination in compliance with summons – whether power to issue pursuant to r 11.10 of the Federal Court (Corporations) Rules 2000 (Cth) ought to be exercised – whether appropriate form of warrant proposed – whether liquidator should have its costs of the application and costs thrown away
↧
Storry, in the matter of Storry [2025] FCA 231
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE — applicant prohibited from initiating any proceedings in the Court without first obtaining leave — application for leave to institute proceedings — where affidavits do not comply with s 37AR(3) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) — where proposed proceedings are vexatious — s 37AS(2) of the Act — leave refused
↧
Clancy v Australian Securities and Investments Commission [2025] FCA 220
CORPORATIONS – application for reinstatement after deregistration – s 601AH of the Corporations Act 2011 (Cth) – principles to be applied – whether plaintiff is an “aggrieved person” – meaning of “just” in s 601AH(2)(b) – application allowed
↧
↧
Fu v Bondi Junction Prime Pty Ltd (No 2) [2025] FCA 221
CONSUMER LAW – where primary judge found that: (1) the first respondent represented to the appellant that the apartment it was selling to the appellant would be on the eleventh and uppermost floor of the building to be constructed; (2) the first respondent had reasonable grounds for the making of the representation – where the appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the first respondent had reasonable grounds – primary judge’s reasoning upheld – appeal dismissed
↧
ERM18 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2025] FCA 228
MIGRATION – appeal from Federal Circuit Court of Australia dismissal of an application for judicial review of a decision of the Immigration Assessment Authority – where Authority affirmed decision of a delegate of the Minister not to grant the appellant a Safe Haven Enterprise (subclass 790) visa – where Authority not satisfied the appellant is a person in respect of whom Australia owes protection obligations – where appellant alleged primary judge failed to have regard to all evidence which was before the Court – whether jurisdictional error shown – appeal dismissed
↧
RJFB v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2025] FCA 229
MIGRATION – application for judicial review – where Minister exercised the power under s 501A(2) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) to set aside the earlier decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal and to refuse the grant of a protection visa on national interest grounds – whether decision affected by jurisdictional error – whether Minister understood the law at that time to mean that a visa refusal decision would result in indefinite detention of applicant per Al-Kateb v Godwin [2004] HCA 37; 219 CLR 562 – whether Minister acted on an incorrect understanding of the law in view of the High Court decision in NZYQ v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs [2023] HCA 37; 97 ALJR 1005 – where Minister conceded error occurred – where error material in accordance with Full Federal Court decision in AJN23 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs [2024] FCAFC 103; 304 FCR 586 – whether Court should nevertheless exercise its discretion not to issue constitutional writs – application allowed
↧