top of page
  • Writer's pictureBrian Bishko

Submissions for interlocutory motions from Meta, Google and Andrew's response

Since the first judgement giving leave to serve in June of this year, Andrew served the case on Meta and Google in the US. Andrew is referred to as "The Applicant" and Meta and Google are the "First and Second Respondents" respectively.


Despite already having asked for the "No Costs Order" and having that application part heard, the court agreed to hear interlocutory applications from both respondents to "permanently stay" and "declass" the proceedings. In other words to stop the case or to remove the class action part and only allow Andrew to sue on behalf of only the damage done to him. This was described in Andrew's post on Hive.


Meta and Google have now served us with their motions and Andrew has filed his response. Those documents are linked here. Andrew will give an update over on Hive shortly.


This is Andrew's response:

Applicant Stay Submissions (stamped) Andrew Hamilton vs Meta Google
.pdf
Download PDF • 738KB
 

The submissions from Meta:

Hamilton v Meta - Submissions, 6 December 2022 (Redacted)
.pdf
Download PDF • 789KB

The submissions from Google:

2022.12
.06 Hamilton v Meta & Ors - Google LLC - Submissions on stay and declassing applica
Download 06 HAMILTON V META & ORS - GOOGLE LLC - SUBMISSIONS ON STAY AND DECLASSING APPLICA • 574KB






58 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Appeal of Judgement Staying Proceedings

As you will have seen from the Court ordered post, the first instance Judgement by Justice Cheeseman on the Respondents Stay Application went against me. I have filed an Application for leave to Appea

Court Ordered Notice

Hamilton v Meta Platforms, Inc. [2023] FCA 1148 Notice to Group Members and Token Holders The Federal Court of Australia has ordered that you receive this Notice because you may be a Group Member or T

Comentarios


bottom of page