Ghosh v Scott Newton trading as Shaw Gidley (No 7) [2023] NSWSC 1558

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Ghosh v Scott Newton trading as Shaw Gidley (No 7) [2023] NSWSC 1558 Hearing dates: 7 December 2023 Date of orders: 7 December 2023 Decision date: 07 December 2023 Jurisdiction: Equity Before: Kunc J Decision: Injunction refused with costs Catchwords: EQUITY — Equitable remedies — Injunctions — Where injunction sought is an attempt to interfere with orders of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Legislation Cited: Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Family Law Rules 2021 (Cth) Cases Cited: Bandyopadhyay & Ghosh (No 8) [2023] FedCFamC1F1000 Ghosh v Miller [2017] FCA 890 Ghosh v Scott Newton trading as Shaw Gidley (No 6) [2023] NSWSC 1393 Miller v Ghosh (No 3) [2016] FCCA 2491 Category: Procedural rulings Parties: Ratna Ghosh (Plaintiff) Scott Newton trading as Shaw Gidley (First Defendant) Rodney Miller (Second Defendant) Representation: Ratna Ghosh (Plaintiff – in person)

Counsel: Mr D Neggo (First Defendant) Solicitors: Stacks Law Firm Southern Highlands (First Defendant)

Rodney Miller (Second Defendant – in person) File Number(s): 2022/284281 Publication restriction: Nil

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT (REVISED)

Summary 1. These proceedings are before me today as part of my current responsibility to manage first instance matters involving the plaintiff, Dr Ratna Ghosh. The question which I have been required to determine today is a narrow one: Would a document entitled "Proposed Amended Statement of Claim" (which I have marked exhibit 1) propounded by Dr Ghosh, if allowed to be filed, provide any sufficient basis to restrain the first defendant (her trustee in bankruptcy, Mr Newton) from seeking to enforce an order (the Possession Order) in his favour made by the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Division 1 (FCFCA) for the possession of a property in Charlestown (the Property). For the reasons which follow, the Court answers that question in the negative. 2. Today Dr Ghosh appeared for herself. Mr D Neggo of Counsel appeared for Mr Newton. There was also an appearance in person by the second defendant, Mr Miller, who ultimately did not wish to be heard.