Abram v National Australia Bank Ltd [2001] NSWSC 916

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : Abram v National Australia Bank Ltd [2001] NSWSC 916 CURRENT JURISDICTION: Common Law FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 20155/00 HEARING DATE(S) : 28/09/01 JUDGMENT DATE : 18 October 2001

PARTIES : Joseph Abram v National Australia Bank Limited JUDGMENT OF : Taylor AJ at 1

In person - Plaintiff COUNSEL : P.M. Wood - First defendant Ms G Mahony - Second defendant SOLICITORS : Henry Davis York - First Defendant CATCHWORDS : Review of decision of Registrar. LEGISLATION CITED : Part 61 r 3 of Supreme Court Rules Webb v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 41 CASES CITED : QBE Workers Compensation (NSW) Pty Ltd v Sports Pit Pty Ltd (in liq). (SC(NSW) Young J, 4286/93, 12/10/95, unreported. Westpac Banking Corp v Amemond Pty Ltd, (SC)NSW) Santow J, 28/10/94, unreported. DECISION : 1. As between the applicant/plaintiff and the respondent/second defendant the second defendant's notice of motion is dismissed. ; 2. Order the applicant/plaintiff to pay the respondent's/second defendant's costs of the motion.; 3. The decision of Assistant Registrar Howe of 28 April 2001 is set aside. ; 4. Direct the applicant file proposed amended statement of claim within 28 days. ; 4. Notice of Motion otherwise dismissed. ; 5. Order the applicant pay the respondent's/first defendant's costs.

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION

TAYLOR A J

THURSDAY, 18 OCTOBER, 2001 20155/00 - Joseph ABRAM -v- NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BANK & STATE OF NEW SOUTH WALES.

JUDGMENT

Introduction 1 HIS HONOUR: Mr Abram is in dispute with the National Australia Bank Limited. This is an application for review of a decision of Assistant Registrar Howe who, on 28 May 2001, dismissed Mr Abram's application to amend his statement of claim. The application is brought pursuant to Part 61 r 3 of the Supreme Court Rules. The plaintiff claims damages against the bank on a number of bases. Essentially he sues on the basis that the bank maliciously and without reasonable and probable cause commenced a malicious prosecution of the plaintiff, charging the plaintiff and another with criminal contempt of Court. Mr Abram's dispute with the bank is long and complex. I will outline the background to the claim and the present application.