Hughes v Accc

JurisdictionAustralia Federal only
CourtFederal Court
Neutral Citation[2004] FCAFC 319,2004-1130 FCA A
Year2004
Date2004

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
13 cases
  • Vaysman v Deckers Outdoor Corporation Inc.
    • Australia
    • Full Federal Court (Australia)
    • Invalid date
  • Anderson v BYF19
    • Australia
    • Federal Court
    • 22 November 2019
    ...(2010) 205 A Crim R 366 Hannaford v HH (No 2) [2012] FCA 560; (2012) 203 FCR 501 Hughes v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2004] FCAFC 319; (2004) 247 FCR 277 Kazal v Thunder Studios Inc (California) [2017] FCAFC 111; (2017) 256 FCR 90 Louis Vuitton Malletier SA v Design Eleg......
  • Lusty v CRA20
    • Australia
    • Federal Court
    • 3 December 2020
    ...FCA 560; (2012) 203 FCR 501 Hili v The Queen [2010] HCA 45; (2010) 242 CLR 520 Hughes v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2004] FCAFC 319; (2004) 247 FCR 277 Kazal v Thunder Studios Inc (California) [2017] FCAFC 111; (2017) 256 FCR 90 Louis Vuitton Malletier SA v Design Elegan......
  • Universal City Studios LLLP v Hoey t/as DVD Kingdom
    • Australia
    • Federal Court
    • 31 May 2007
    ...2) [1983] 2 NSWLR 354 Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Hickey (1999) 42 ATR 229 Hughes v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2004] FCAFC 319 Pattison (Trustee), in the matter of Bell (Bankrupt) v Bell [2007] FCA 137 Ripcurl International Pty Ltd v Phone Lab Pty Ltd [2004] FCA 1......
  • Get Started for Free