Zippo Manufacturing Company v Jaxlawn Pty Ltd

JurisdictionAustralia Federal only
CourtFederal Court
Neutral Citation2011-0929 FCA A
Year2011
Date2011

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
9 cases
  • Matson v Attorney-General (No 2)
    • Australia
    • Federal Court
    • 10 March 2022
    ...of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth). The tests are identical, apart from s 31A(3): Zippo Manufacturing Co v Jaxlawn Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 1125 at [20] (Gordon J). Even though it has no equivalent in r 26.01, it seems to me that s 31A(3) clarifies, but does not alter, the ordinary meaning of ......
  • Quach v Commissioner of Taxation
    • Australia
    • Federal Court
    • 24 October 2019
    ...(1921) 30 CLR 80 Wingfoot Australia Partners Pty Ltd v Kocak [2013] HCA 43; (2013) 252 CLR 480 Zippo Manufacturing Co v Jaxlawn Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 1125 Date of hearing: 11 June 2019 Registry: Western Australia Division: General Division National Practice Arthe proceeding or that part of the......
  • Mineralogy Pty Ltd v Australian Securities and Investments Commission
    • Australia
    • Federal Court
    • 24 August 2021
    ...Court Act, rather than r 26.01 of the Rules, those “provisions contain identical tests”: Zippo Manufacturing Co v Jaxlawn Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 1125 at [20] (Gordon J). The relevant inquiry is “not an enquiry directed to whether a certain and concluded determination could be made that the proc......
  • Nyamal Palyku Proceeding
    • Australia
    • Federal Court
    • 27 March 2020
    ...to fail) is not included in r 26.01, the section and the rule contain identical tests (see Zippo Manufacturing Co v Jaxlawn Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 1125 at [20] per Gordon J and Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Cassimatis (2013) 220 FCR 256; [2013] FCA 641 at [13] per Reeves As......
  • Get Started for Free