STATE RAIL AUTHORITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES v SUNDERLAND [1992] NSWCA 241
NSW Caselaw
Full text
Select any passage to save a personal note with optional tags.
STATE RAIL AUTHORITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES v SUNDERLAND
SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL
KIRBY P, PRIESTLEY and SHELLER JJ
7 December 1992, 7 December 1992
[1992] NSWCA 241
LIMITATIONS — whether right of action extinguished — whether equitable and
other remedies to restrain late enlargement of defence — held: (dismissing
summons): Leave to appeal premature.
Kirby P (Expressing the reasons of the Court for dismissing the summons):
The Court is of the opinion that the summons for leave to appeal should be
dismissed. The Court is of the view that it would be premature, at this stage, to
bring the matter up. There are other discretionary decisions which are, or may
still be, to be determined between the parties at first instance.
Necessarily, this decision of the Court does not foreclose any application
which the claimant may be advised to make to a judge at first instance to enlarge
its defence. Whether or not the claimant seeks to enlarge its defence, whether or
not any such application is, upon discretionary grounds, successful or
unsuccessful, the claimant may have an entitlement to raise, in any appeal against
any final judgment that is recovered by the opponent, its objection which it has
sought to raise in this summons for leave to appeal. It may, for example, be able
to do so by the modern equivalent of a motion to stay the entry of judgment. That
is not a matter upon which the Court will pass today. We have not heard full
argument on this matter, upon which argument would certainly be required.
A transcript of argument will be available to the parties. It will reveal the
considerations of a discretionary kind which were concerning the Court. Of
necessity, the Court's orders do not involve any final determination of the
correctness of the decision of Badgery-Parker J.
The summons for leave to appeal is dismissed. Necessarily, the claimant must
bear the opponent's costs of the summons.
Counsel for the Claimant: PR Sternberg
Instructed by: Astridge and Murray
Counsel for the Opponent: GM Watson
Instructed by: White Barnes and McGuire
Related laws
No related documents linked yet.
You've got 21 of 22 free Acts left this visit. Sign up anytime for Facts, Related, and study briefs too.