Today

Practice and Procedure
McKenna (liquidator), in the matter of Raised Pty Ltd (in liq) [2025] FCA 699
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for issue of arrest warrant – where summons was issued requiring attendance at examination – where examinee failed to attend examination – whether arrest warrant ought to be issued pursuant to r 11.10 of the Federal Court (Corporations) Rules 2000 (Cth)
27 Jun 2025 |  KENNETT J

Costs
AxiCorp Financial Services Pty Ltd v CABC (No 2) [2025] FCA 698
COSTS — application for costs under s 570 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) — whether respondent engaged in unreasonable act or omission by not giving undertaking over alleged confidential information — where applicant sought injunction and suppression orders to prevent disclosure of alleged confidential information — where applicant sought costs on indemnity basis — HELD: costs awarded to applicant on indemnity basis
27 Jun 2025 |  BROMWICH J

Representative Proceedings
B3S2 Pty Ltd as Trustee for the B & S D'Avoine Enduring Family Superannuation Fund v Australian Public Custodian Limited (in liq) (No 2) [2025] FCA 719
REPRESENTATIVE PROCEEDINGS – approval of settlement – application under s 33V of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) for approval of settlement of proceeding on terms of Deed of Settlement and for approval of proposed Settlement Distribution Scheme – whether proposed settlement is fair and reasonable having regard to interests of class members – where solicitors acting on a speculative basis – whether proposed deductions from the settlement sum are fair and reasonable – consideration of solicitors’ costs to be recovered – settlement approved PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application under s 37AG(1)(a) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) for orders that written submissions and certain documents exhibited to affidavit material filed by the applicant be treated as confidential and not be published until further order on the grounds that orders are necessary to prevent prejudice to the proper administration of justice – where documents contain personal information and contents of legally privileged advice on prospects – orders made
19 Jun 2025 |  SARAH C DERRINGTON J

Workers Compensation
Linfox Australia Pty Ltd v Warusawithana [2025] FCA 717
WORKERS COMPENSATION – appeal from decision of Administrative Review Tribunal – compensation in respect of medical expenses and incapacity benefits under ss 16 and 19 of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) (SRC Act) – where Tribunal reviewed employer’s decision that no present liability to pay compensation in respect of respondent’s injury as at date of determination – where Tribunal substituted decision under s 105 of the Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 (Cth) that respondent be paid compensation “to the present and continuing” – whether Tribunal failed to make necessary findings for decisions under ss 16 and 19 of the SRC Act – orders proposed by consent setting aside Tribunal’s decision and remitting the matter to be decided again according to law – whether consent orders are within power and appropriate – appeal allowed by consent
30 Jun 2025 |  HORAN J

Migration
DDK18 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2025] FCA 712
MIGRATION – appeal from decision of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) – where primary judge dismissed application for judicial review of decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – whether primary judge denied appellant procedural fairness and/or made incorrect assessment of materiality in drawing conclusion inconsistent with concession made by the respondent Minister – whether primary judge erred in not recognising jurisdictional error in Tribunal’s failure to take account of evidence in respect of appellant’s relationship with former partner – whether primary judge erred in failing to conclude Tribunal made jurisdictional error in requiring appellant to provide corroborating documentary evidence – appeal dismissed.
30 Jun 2025 |  SNADEN J

Migration
Stamekovic v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2025] FCA 707
MIGRATION – Application for judicial review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – Where Tribunal affirmed the decision of a delegate of the Minister not to revoke the cancellation of the applicant’s visa under s 501CA(4) of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) – Tribunal bound by a direction issued under s 499 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) to consider the best interests of minor children in Australia – Whether Tribunal failed to make findings in the best interests of the child – Whether Tribunal failed to make findings for each individual child – Whether Tribunal failed to consider substantial, clearly articulated claim – Whether Tribunal failed to give proper, genuine and/or realistic consideration – Whether denial of procedural fairness
30 Jun 2025 |  MEAGHER J

Trade Marks
National Cancer Foundation v Registrar of Trade Marks [2025] FCA 711
TRADE MARKS – appeal from decision of Registrar of Trade Marks to revoke registration of a trade mark – whether requirements in s 84A of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) (Act) are met – whether there is a basis to be satisfied that the mark should not have been registered – whether mark is deceptively similar to prior registered marks pursuant to s 44 of the Act – whether revocation reasonable – no basis to be satisfied that the trade mark should not have been registered – not reasonable to revoke registration – appeal allowed
30 Jun 2025 |  MCEVOY J

Migration
Eru v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2025] FCA 709
MIGRATION – application for judicial review of a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal’s pursuant to s 476A of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) — where no issue that the applicant did not pass the character test under s 501(6) — where central issue before the Tribunal was whether there existed another reason to revoke the visa cancellation — whether the Tribunal failed to comply with paragraph 8.1.2(b) of Direction No. 99 — whether the Tribunal’s finding that the applicant’s risk of re-offending “was in moderate range” was illogical, irrational and/or legally unreasonable — application dismissed
30 Jun 2025 |  O'SULLIVAN J