NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Saul v Pool Data Systems [2008] NSWSC 249
HEARING DATE(S) : 19 March 2008
JUDGMENT DATE : 28 March 2008
JURISDICTION : Common Law
JUDGMENT OF : Harrison AsJ
(1) Leave to appeal is granted. (2) The appeal is upheld. DECISION : (3) The order made by his Honour McCosker LCM dated 4 July 2007 striking out Mr Saul's defence is set aside. (4) The matter is remitted to the Local Court at Forster to be determined according to law. (5) Costs are reserved pending receipt of the defendant's written submissions within 14 days.
CATCHWORDS : LEAVE TO APPEAL - Local Court Magistrate - Strike out defence
LEGISLATION CITED : Civil Procedure Act 2005 Local Courts Act 1982
CATEGORY : Principal judgment
CASES CITED : Erhard v Bhatia [2002] NSWCA 388 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499
PARTIES : Edward Earle Saul (Plaintiff) Pool Data Systems Pty Ltd (Defendant)
FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 13905/2007
COUNSEL : P Batley (Plaintiff)
SOLICITORS : Priest McCarron (Plaintiff) Mark M Morris (Submitting Appeal - Defendant)
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : Local Court
LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 257/2006
LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER : McCosker LCM
LOWER COURT DATE OF DECISION : 4 July 2007
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION
ASSOCIATE JUSTICE HARRISON
FRIDAY, 28 MARCH 2008
13905/2007 - EDWARD EARLE SAUL v POOL DATA SYSTEMS PTY LTD
JUDGMENT (Leave to appeal decision of Local Court Magistrate – strike out defence) 1 HER HONOUR: By amended summons filed 19 March 2008, the plaintiff seeks leave to appeal against an order made by his Honour McCosker LCM on 4 July 2007 in the Local Court at Forster in matter number 257/2006. The plaintiff relied upon the affidavits of Mathew Lindeman sworn 7 December 2007 and Sally Bryant affirmed 7 December 2007. The defendant filed a submitting appearance save as to costs. 2 The plaintiff in these proceedings is Edward Earle Saul (Mr Saul) who was the defendant in the Local Court proceedings. The defendant in these proceedings is Pool Data Systems Pty Ltd (Pool Data) who was the plaintiff in the Local Court proceedings. For convenience, in this judgment I shall refer to the parties by name.
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