Slade & Anor v Gea & Anor [2000] NSWSC 806

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : Slade & Anor v Gea & Anor [2000] NSWSC 806 CURRENT JURISDICTION: Common Law Division FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 10908/00 HEARING DATE(S) : 9 August 2000 JUDGMENT DATE : 9 August 2000

PARTIES : Leslie Slade & Robyn Slade v Luis Gea & Katalina Gea t/as Galaxy Furniture JUDGMENT OF : Sperling J at 1

S Y Reuben (Plaintiff/Opponent) COUNSEL : A P Healey (Defendant/Claimant) Forbes Smith & Company (Plaintiff/Opponent) SOLICITORS : Michie Shehadie & Co (Defendant/claimant) CATCHWORDS : Practice and procedure - security for costs. LEGISLATION CITED : Justice's Act 1902. CASES CITED : Abdurahman v Field (Unreported) NSWCA 4 March 1986; Rajski v Computer Manufacture & Design Pty Ltd (1983) 2 NSWLR 122; Rajski v Computer Manufacture & Design Pty Ltd (1982) 2 NSWLR 443; Merridee Pastoral Industries Pty Ltd v ANZ Banking Group Limited (1998) 193 CLR 502. DECISION : Notice of motion for security for costs is dismissed - orders made see paragraph 15.

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION

CLD10908/00 SPERLING J

Wednesday, 9 August 2000 Leslie SLADE & ANOR v Luis GEA T/AS GALAXY FURNITURE & ANOR JUDGMENT

1 HIS HONOUR: By summons filed on 17 April 2000, the plaintiffs Leslie Slade and Roslyn Slade appeal in relation to a determination at the Local Court. 2 The Local Court proceedings were brought by a Mr and Mrs Gea claiming money for work done in relation to the plaintiff's kitchen. The Slades cross-claimed for damages for alleged poor performance of part of the work and alleged non performance of part of the work. The Geas are defendants to the proceedings in this Court. 3 In the Local Court the learned magistrate made findings as to the credibility of the protagonists. She accepted the Geas as being credible witnesses. She took the contrary view in relation to Slades, making trenchant criticisms of them and expressing the view that they had intentionally attempted to mislead the court. The result of the proceedings before the learned magistrate was that the Geas succeeded in their claim for work done and the Slades failed in their cross-claim for damages. The Slades were ordered to pay a sum of $6,000 odd with interest of $3,000 odd, the total judgment being in the order of $10,000. It is from that determination that the appeal has been brought by summons in this court. 4 The Geas have filed a notice of motion claiming orders as follows: