NSW Caselaw
Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Teoh v Hunters Hill Council (No 4) [2011] NSWCA 324 Hearing dates: 25 July 2011 Decision date: 18 October 2011 Before: Allsop P, Beazley JA, Handley AJA Decision: (1) Notice of motion of 9 December 2010 dismissed with costs. (2) The Registrar is directed, should the applicant file a further motion seeking, in substance, leave to appeal from the judgment of Sheahan J of 31 July 2009 [2009] NSWLEC 121, to promptly vacate the return date, notify the parties, and refer the papers to a Judge nominated by the President to determine, in Chambers, whether the Court should fix a new return date and notify the parties, or whether Mrs Teoh should be invited to show cause in writing why the Court should not, in Chambers, summarily dismiss the proceedings as vexatious and an abuse of process. [Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.] Catchwords: ABUSE OF PROCESS - Court can act of its own motion to control abuse of its process PRACTICE - interlocutory application refused - renewed application competent - further application may be abuse of process Cases Cited: Burton v President & Ors of Shire of Bairnsdale [1908] HCA 57, 7 CLR 76 Carr v Finance Corporation of Australia (No 1) [1981] HCA 20, 147 CLR 246 Chouman v Margules (1993) 17 MVR 144 CA Clyne v NSW Bar Association [1960] HCA 40, 104 CLR 186 Commonwealth Trading Bank v Inglis [1974] HCA 17, 131 CLR 311 Cracknell v Janson (1879) 11 Ch D 1 Dudgeon v Chie [1955] HCA 42, 92 CLR 342 Haggard v Pelicier Freres [1892] AC 61 Re Harrison's Share under a Settlement [1955] Ch 260 CA Metropolitan Bank v Pooley (1885) 10 App Cas 210 North Western Salt Co. Ltd v Electrolytic Alkali Co. Ltd [1914] AC 461 Sanofi v Parke Davis Pty Ltd (No 1) [1982] HCA 9, 149 CLR 147 Sun Life Assurance Co of Canada v Jervis [1944] AC 111 Thynne v Thynne [1955] P 272 CA Category: Principal judgment Parties: Applicant: Elaine Teoh 1st Respondent - Hunters Hill Council 2nd Respondent - Ross E Williams Representation: Applicant: In Person 1st Respondent - Ms M Carpenter 2nd Respondent - Mr R Czinner Amicus Curiae - Mr J Sheller & Mr D Joyce Applicant in Person 1st Respondent - Ebsworth Lawyers 2nd Respondent - Ronald S Czinner & Co File Number(s): CA 09/298486 Decision under appeal Date of Decision: 2010-11-25 00:00:00 Before: Allsop P, Beazley JA and Handley AJA File Number(s): CA 09/298486
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