NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Appeal
CITATION: Wakim v Coleman [2010] NSWCA 221
HEARING DATE(S): 2 August 2010
JUDGMENT DATE: 2 September 2010
JUDGMENT OF: Giles JA at 1; Hodgson JA at 2; Macfarlan JA at 3
DECISION: The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.
CATCHWORDS: PROCEDURE - civil - meaning of originating process - period for which originating process valid for service - test to be applied on application to extend that period - PROCEDURE - judgments and orders - resort to extrinsic material for the purposes of construction of order where order ambiguous
LEGISLATION CITED: Civil Procedure Act 2005 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules
CATEGORY: Principal judgment
Chalmers v Redwood Anti-Ageing Pty Ltd [2007] NSWSC 1186; (2007) 215 FLR 8 D'Orta-Ekenaike v Victoria Legal Aid [2005] HCA 12; (2005) 223 CLR 1 Heaven v Roads & Rail Wagons Ltd [1965] 2 QB 355 CASES CITED: House v The King [1936] HCA 40; (1936) 55 CLR 499 Owston Nominees No 2 Pty Ltd v Branir Pty Ltd [2003] FCA 629; (2003) 129 FCR 558 Symonds v Vass [2009] NSWCA 139; (2009) 257 ALR 689 Tolcher v Gordon [2005] NSWCA 135; (2005) 53 ACSR 442
Elias George Wakim (Applicant) David Coleman (First Respondent) Gervase Liddy (Second Respondent) PARTIES: Peter Wilson (Third Respondent) Stephen Cahill (Fourth Respondent) Ray McClenahan (Fifth Respondent) David Murr (Sixth Respondent) Andrew Ogborne (Seventh Respondent)
FILE NUMBER(S): CA 2009/298164
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