Browse Federal Court Judgments

Defamation
Al Muderis v Nine Network Australia Pty Limited (Trial Judgment) [2025] FCA 909
DEFAMATION – where the applicant is a well-known orthopaedic surgeon – where applicant sues in defamation over a 60 Minutes program broadcast by Nine Network – where publications televised, published online and in print – where 75 defamatory imputations alleged DEFAMATION – defences – substantial truth – justification defence – s 25 of the Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) – where imputations conveyed may be summarised into 9 stings – imputations involving improper sales tactic, misleading osseointegration patients, poor patient selection, negligent post-operative care, illegal procedures in the United States, prioritising money, fame, reputation and numbers, mistreating staff, lying to journalists, unethical conduct case DEFAMATION – defences – contextual truth – s 26 of the Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) – some imputations established as substantially true – whether imputations not substantially true or where there is no truth defence do not further harm the applicant’s reputation – contextual truth considers the facts, matters and circumstances relied upon to support the substantial truth of the contextual imputations rather than the terms of the imputation – defence established DEFAMATION – defences – public interest – s 29A of the Defamation Act 2005 (NSW) – consideration of legislative construction – whether the respondents reasonably believed the matters published was in the public interest – flaws in a matter will not necessarily preclude the defence – inform prospective patients about a cohort of the applicant’s patients who had negative experiences – defence established EVIDENCE – observation as to fact-finding, onus and standards of proof – inferences in relation to the failure of a party to call a particular witness: Jones v Dunkel [1959] HCA 8; (1959) 101 CLR 298 – principles in Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67 (HL) – consideration of contemporaneous documents – consideration of standard practice and inferences that may be drawn – consideration o
ABRAHAM J - 8 Aug 2025

Migration
Chalissery v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2025] FCA 923
MIGRATION — application for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal — short delay, no prejudice to the first respondent — where no draft notice of appeal accompanied the application — where applicant was without sponsored employment for more than 60 days — where no prospects of a successful appeal — application dismissed
O'SULLIVAN J - 8 Aug 2025

Practice and Procedure
Al Muderis v Nine Network Australia Pty Limited (No 5) [2025] FCA 908
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for evidence of two of the respondents’ witnesses to be heard via video link from United States – application for evidence of one of the respondents’ witnesses to be heard via video link from South Australia – the relevant principles to the exercise of discretion to permit evidence by video link – discussion of difficulties that can be associated with cross-examination via video link – call for production of documents over video link – application granted
ABRAHAM J - 8 Aug 2025

Corporations Law
Australian Securities and Investments Commission v iSignthis Limited (Penalty) [2025] FCA 917
CORPORATIONS – disqualification orders and pecuniary penalties sought against director and company – where serious contraventions of ss 180, 674(2A) and 1309(1) and (12) of the Corporations Act 2009 (Cth) by director – where serious contravention of s 674(2) of the Act by company – where contraventions involved misleading market and market operator – where contraventions had serious impact on market – where contraventions were deliberate and continuing – where there is an absence of contrition and cooperation – asserted mitigating factors including reliance on external legal advice are not exculpatory – nature and extent of contraventions, protection of the public, and deterrence justify disqualification and pecuniary penalties to be ordered in respect of director – nature and extent of the contraventions and deterrence justify pecuniary penalty to be ordered in respect of company
MCEVOY J - 8 Aug 2025

Migration
RCWV v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2025] FCA 907
MIGRATION – application for extension of time to lodge application for judicial review of migration decision – extension of time granted – application for judicial review of Minister’s decision under s 501BA of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – whether Minister erred by failing to consider material advanced by the applicant – whether Minister misunderstood the nature of the power under s 501BA(2) – application dismissed
MCEVOY J - 8 Aug 2025

Practice and Procedure
Akibou Yacouba v Key Assets The Children's Services Provider (Australia) Limited (No 2) [2025] FCA 928
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE– litigant in person – non-attendance – application by respondent for consolidation of related actions – orders made
BANKS-SMITH J - 7 Aug 2025

Corporations Law
Platinum Capital Limited, in the matter of Platinum Capital Limited (No 2) [2025] FCA 925
CORPORATIONS – application under s 1319 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) to cancel a meeting of shareholders convened pursuant to s 411(1) of the Corporations Act – where scheme resolution unlikely to attain requisite approval due to opposition of substantial shareholder – where scheme implementation deed terminated – where directors of opinion that cancellation of the scheme meeting is in best interests of shareholders – whether to exercise power to order that scheme meeting not be held and to vacate earlier orders requiring the scheme meeting to be held – Held: application granted
CHEESEMAN J - 8 Aug 2025

High Court and Federal Judiciary
Luck v Secretary, Services Australia (Vexatious Proceedings Order) [2025] FCAFC 103
HIGH COURT AND FEDERAL COURT – vexatious proceedings order pursuant to s 37AO of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) (the Act) – where the appellant has a long and active career as a litigant in Australian courts and tribunals – where the appellant’s litigious activity is characterised by delays, spurious interlocutory applications, refusals to prosecute proceedings once commenced and avoidance of hearings – whether the appellant’s litigious history indicates an abuse of process – whether the Court’s power under s 37AO of the Act to make a vexatious proceedings order on its own initiative is engaged – whether making a vexatious proceedings order is appropriate – whether the exercise of such power is “procedurally” deficient
ROFE, HESPE AND KENNETT JJ - 11 Jun 2025

Migration
Prasad v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs [2025] FCAFC 102
MIGRATION – appeal from decision of primary judge – whether primary judge erred in finding the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Tribunal) did not deny the appellant procedural fairness – where Tribunal affirmed decision not to revoke cancellation of visa under s 501CA(4) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) (the Act) – where Tribunal made adverse credibility findings against appellant’s witnesses – where Tribunal notified appellant after hearing of possible adverse findings – whether appellant had reasonable opportunity to respond – where Tribunal gave opportunity for further submissions – where Tribunal was required by s 500(6L) of the Act to make decision in short time period – no error established – appeal dismissed
RANGIAH, JACKSON AND MEAGHER JJ - 8 Aug 2025

Practice and Procedure
Kitoko v University of Technology Sydney (No 3) [2025] FCA 915
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for extension of time and leave to appeal – where application for leave to appeal is more than three years out of time – where no adequate explanation provided for the delay – prejudice to the respondents – proposed appeal has insufficient prospects of success – application dismissed – timetable made for vexatious litigant orders to be considered
SHARIFF J - 8 Aug 2025

Practice and Procedure
Kitoko v Sydney Local Health District [2025] FCA 914
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – interlocutory application for summary judgment and dismissal of the applicant’s originating application – where the applicant repeats claims previously considered and dismissed by the Supreme Court of New South Wales (SC Proceedings) – where the parties to the present proceedings are identical to the parties in the SC Proceedings – where leave to appeal from the decision in the SC Proceedings was refused – where special leave application was refused by the High Court – where claims introduced in these proceedings rely on the same factual substratum of claims already determined – whether applicant’s claims have reasonable prospects of success – whether present proceedings are an abuse of process – whether claims are precluded by an issue or Anshun estoppel – interlocutory application allowed – proceedings dismissed
SHARIFF J - 8 Aug 2025

Practice and Procedure
Qinao Lianchuang (Zhuhai) Development Co. Ltd v Shandong Yulong Gold Co. Ltd [2025] FCA 912
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for continuation of freezing and ancillary orders pursuant to rr 7.32 and 7.33 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – where prospective applicant has benefit of arbitration award in foreign jurisdiction – whether good arguable case for recognition of foreign arbitral award – where risk of diminution of value of assets in Australia established – whether risk of undermining Court’s processes following recognition of foreign arbitral award – whether balance of convenience favours the continuation of the freezing orders – held: freezing order made
CHEESEMAN J - 18 Jul 2025

Migration
EDG16 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2025] FCA 913
MIGRATION – appeal from decision of Federal Circuit Court of Australia dismissing appellant’s application for judicial review of decision of Minister for Immigration and Citizenship – where Minister refused to grant visa and determined appellant was “excluded fast track review applicant” –where appellant previously applied for protection and was refused – definition of “excluded fast track review applicant” – whether “significantly new claims” within definition of “excluded fast track review applicant” – appeal dismissed with costs
COLLIER J - 7 Aug 2025

Practice and Procedure
Australian Securities and Investments Commission v eToro Aus Capital Limited (No 2) [2025] FCA 904
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application to rely on late evidence – where respondent sought to file expert evidence six months after date specified in orders – where delay arose from underestimation of respondent’s capacity to prepare expert evidence – whether late evidence is of utility – where questions of relevance arose at interlocutory hearing – relevance of evidence to be considered at trial – whether applicant suffered prejudice – where sufficient time for applicant to file evidence in reply – where proceeding is a civil penalty proceeding – leave granted to rely on late evidence
STELLIOS J - 7 Aug 2025

Patents
The NOCO Company v Brown and Watson International Pty Ltd [2025] FCA 887
PATENTS – jump starter device for jump starting a depleted or discharged battery (eg in a vehicle) – priority date – where the patents in suit claimed an earliest priority date based on the filing date of a PCT application – where the cross-claimant contended that the patents were not entitled to the asserted priority date – whether, for each asserted claim, the invention in the claim was disclosed in the PCT application PATENTS – jump starter device for jump starting a depleted or discharged battery (eg in a vehicle) – novelty and inventive step –whether the claims in the patents in suit were anticipated by one or other of two documents – whether the claims in the patents in suit would have been obvious to the person skilled in the art in light of the common general knowledge (CGK) alone, or in light of the CGK together with one or other of two documents PATENTS – jump starter device for jump starting a depleted or discharged battery (eg in a vehicle) – best method – where the cross-claimant contended that the patentee had not disclosed the best method known to the patentee for performing the invention – whether the knowledge element was to be determined as at the international filing date or as at the filing date for the patents in suit PATENTS – jump starter device for jump starting a depleted or discharged battery (eg in a vehicle) – infringement – whether the impugned products infringed the claims in the patents in suit – construction issues – whether the claims required that the device automatically start upon satisfaction of preconditions – whether a product that is capable of operating in manual mode falls outside the scope of the claims – whether references to “USB” in the claims encompass USB-C, which had not been released as at the asserted priority date
MOSHINSKY J - 7 Aug 2025

Costs
ANW18 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (No 2) [2025] FCA 916
COSTS – appellant ordered to pay first respondent’s costs – first respondent entitled to proceed to taxation in absence of agreement – bill of costs served – Taxing Officer’s assessment made – appellant ordinarily required to pay security for costs of the taxation in order to object to the estimate – appellant instead bringing an interlocutory application for an order that the first respondent’s costs be fixed in a lump sum – proposed lump sum significantly lower than estimate amount – no explanation for delay in seeking lump sum costs order – insufficient evidence to support sum claimed – whether contrary to overarching purpose of practice and procedure provisions to entertain further submissions in absence of explanation for appellant’s delay in bringing the application
CHARLESWORTH J - 29 Jul 2025

Migration
BHW17 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2025] FCA 906
MIGRATION - application for extension of time for judicial review of decision of Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) - leave sought to raise grounds of appeal not before primary judge - application filed 504 days after time fixed for appeal - delay not adequately explained - little merit in applicant's proposed grounds of appeal - application dismissed
JACKSON J - 7 Aug 2025

Copyright
McCallum v Projector Films Pty Ltd [2025] FCA 903
COPYRIGHT – interlocutory application – dispute over which of two persons is to be attributed and credited as the “principal director” of a documentary to be premiered this week at the Melbourne International Film Festival – moral rights – right of attribution of authorship – false attribution – misleading and deceptive conduct – interlocutory injunctive relief – serious question to be tried – balance of convenience – relief granted
SHARIFF J - 6 Aug 2025

Representative Proceedings
Riverine Grazier Pty Ltd v Google LLC [2025] FCA 895
REPRESENTATIVE PROCEEDINGS – Multiplicity of proceedings – where two “open class” representative proceedings commenced against same respondents raising similar issues – applications for stay of proceeding made – relevant principles – where group membership in one proceeding is a broader class than the other – where claims made in one proceeding have a broader scope than the other – where the proposed budget in one proceeding is higher and more realistic than the other – where the funding arrangements to support the costs of the litigation are more comprehensive and therefore more beneficial to group members in one proceeding PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – where a second firm of solicitors engaged to act in a representative proceeding pursuant to an agency agreement – likelihood of wasted costs – no evidence adduced explaining the reasons for the appointment – possibility that appointment reflects an anti-competitive arrangement between the solicitors and litigation funders – appropriate form of orders to avoid duplication of costs
O'BRYAN J - 6 Aug 2025

Practice and Procedure
Chu v Lin, in the matter of Gold Stone Capital Pty Ltd (No 11) [2025] FCA 905
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – enforcement of judgment – application concerning distribution of net proceeds of sale of property – where plaintiffs awarded equitable compensation – where respondents claimed entitlement to net proceeds – where only one respondent filed points of claim which was subsequently discontinued – where plaintiffs filed defence and points of claim – where plaintiffs’ solicitors unsuccessfully attempted to contact other respondents – respondents’ entitlement claim apparently abandoned – appropriate to hear and determine matters raised by plaintiffs’ points of claim pursuant to r 17.04 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – where plaintiff assigned rights, title and interest in facility agreement between second defendant and moneylender – plaintiffs entitled to amount from net proceeds
JACKMAN J - 5 Aug 2025