Richman, R.M. v. Pacific Waste Management P/L [1994] FCA 876

* Senscsnnssenee:

JUDGMENT NO. ounu.0,6 7 94

No. G 378 of 1992

ot et

GENERAL DIVISION Between: ROBERT MICHAEL RICHMAN Applicant RECEIVED And: PACIFIC WASTE MANAGEMENT PTY LIMITED (ACN 002 902 650 22 NOV 1994 ( Respondent FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA PRINCIPAL REASONS FOR JUDGMENT SYDNEY VE R 4

The respondent moves for an order under Order 35 rule 7 varying the judgment given in this matter on 6 December 1993 awarding

damages to the applicant of $89,000. Order 35 rule 7 states:

(1) The Court may vary or set aside a judgment or order before it has been entered.

(2) The Court, where it is not exercising its appellate or related jurisdiction under Division 2 of Part III of the Act, may if it thinks fit vary or set aside a judgment or order after the order has been entered where -

(a) the order has been made in the absence of a

' party, whether or not the absent party is in default of appearance or otherwise in default and whether or not the absent party had notice of the motion for the order;

(b) the order was obtained by fraud;

(c) the order is interlocutory;

(ad) the order is an injunction or for the appointment of a receiver;

(e) the order does not reflect the intention of the Court; or

(f) the party in whose favour the order was made consents.

(3) A clerical mistake in a judgment or order, or an error arising in a judgment or order from an

-2-

accidental slip or omission, may at any time be corrected by the Court.

(4) Sub-rule (2) shall not affect the power of the

Court to vary or terminate the operation of an order by a supplementary order.

The judgment in this matter was entered on 9 February 1994 so that this application does not arise under subrule (1). No evidence has been led on any of the matters covered by subrule (2). Nor is subrule (4) relevant to this application which therefore turns on whether what is popularly known as the "slip