NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : HILLSTON v. BAR-MORDECAI [2002] NSWSC 975 CURRENT JURISDICTION: EQUITY FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 3240/98 HEARING DATE(S) : 24/05/2002 JUDGMENT DATE : 31 May 2002
PARTIES : Allan David James Hillston - Plaintiff Michael Jacob Bar-Mordecai - Defendant JUDGMENT OF : Bryson J at 1
COUNSEL : J. Whittle & B.J. Burke - Plaintiff M. Bar-Mordecai - Defendant in Person SOLICITORS : Shaw McDonald for plaintiff Defendant in Person CATCHWORDS : PRACTICE and PROCEDURE - interlocutory motions - restraint of repeated interlocutory motions - the defendant was restrained from making further interlocutory motions without leave of a Judge. LEGISLATION CITED : Supreme Court Act 1970; s.84 Lord Kinnard v. Field [1905] 2 Ch 306 Grepe v. Loam (1887) 37 ChD 168 Suir v. Newton (1886) 37 ChD 169 Commonwealth Trading Bank v. Inglis (1974) 131 CLR 311 Attorney General v. Wentworth (1998) 14 NSWLR 481 CASES CITED : Yeldham v. Rajski (1989) 18 NSWLR 48 Rajski v. Powell [1987] 11 NSWLR 522 Re JRL: Ex parte CJL (198) 161 CLR 342 at 352 Bainton v. Rajski (1992) 29 NSWLR 539 Carr v. Finance Corporation of Australia Ltd [No. 1] (1981) 147 CLR 246 Brimaud v. Honeysett Instant Print Pty Ltd (McLelland J 19 September 1988) DECISION : See para.18 - restrain defendant from filing Notices of Motion.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES EQUITY DIVISION
BRYSON J
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate