Toyne v Stokes [2022] NSWDC 292

District Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Toyne v Stokes [2022] NSWDC 292 Hearing dates: 13 July 2022 Date of orders: 26 July 2022 Decision date: 26 July 2022 Jurisdiction: Civil Before: Russell SC DCJ Decision: (1) Dismiss the plaintiff's Notice of Motion filed on 14 September 2021. (2) Strike out the Statement of Claim filed on 5 July 2021. (3) Grant leave to the plaintiff to file an Amended Statement of Claim by 23 August 2022. (4) Order the plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs of the Notice of Motion filed on 14 September 2021. (5) Dismiss the defendant's Notice of Motion filed on 10 October 2021. (6) Order the defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs of the Notice of Motion filed on 10 October 2021. Catchwords: PROCEDURE – Contracts for sale of land – purchaser did work on land and contaminated it with asbestos – contracts terminated by vendor – Supreme Court proceedings seeking relief against forfeiture of deposits – later District Court proceedings by vendor seeking damages against purchaser for contamination of land – whether District Court proceedings were estopped by Anshun principles – whether District Court proceedings should be stayed as an abuse of process Legislation Cited: Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW), s 55(2A) Cases Cited: Champers Life Pty Ltd v Manojlovski [2010] NSWSC 641 Cromwell v County of Sac (1876) 94 U.S. 351 Hannigan v Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd [2021] NSWSC 641 Henderson v Henderson (1843) 67 ER 319 Jacobellis v Ohio (1963) 378 U.S. 184 Johnson v Gore Wood & Co [2002] 2 AC 1 Port of Melbourne Authority v Anshun Pty Ltd [1981] HCA 45; (1981) 147 CLR 589 Stokes v Toyne [2019] NSWSC 274 Stokes v Toyne [2021] NSWSC 1049 Tanning Research v O'Brien [1990] HCA 8; (1990) 169 CLR 332 UBS AG v Tyne [2018] HCA 45; (2018) 265 CLR 77 Category: Procedural rulings Parties: Molly Toyne (Plaintiff) Nathan Stokes (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: M Castle and A Bailey (Plaintiff) N Oram (Defendant)