Singh v The Owners - Strata Plan 11723 [2012] NSWSC 519

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Singh v The Owners - Strata Plan 11723 [2012] NSWSC 519 Hearing dates: 16 May 2012 Decision date: 18 May 2012 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Adamson J Decision: Summons dismissed with costs Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - jurisdiction of the Supreme Court - transfers from the District Court to the Supreme Court under s 140 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 - jurisdiction of the Local Court under s 30 of the Local Court Act 2007 - meaning of "action" for the purposes of s 127 of the District Court Act 1973 - dismissal of proceedings under s 60 of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) Legislation Cited: - Strata Schemes Management Act 1996 - Civil Procedure Act 2005 - Local Court Act 2007 - District Court Act 1973 - Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) Cases Cited: - Rinbac Pty Ltd v Owners Corporation Strata Plan 64972 [2010] NSWSC 656; 77 NSWLR 601 - Muldoon v Church of England Children's Homes Burwood [2011] NSWCA 46 - Dr Falamaki v Wollongong City Council [2010] NSWSC 38 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Jagjit Singh (Plaintiff) The Owners - Strata Plan 11723 (Defendant) Representation: Plaintiff in person S Quang (Sol) (Defendant) Grace Lawyers (Defendant) File Number(s): 2012/93218

Judgment

Introduction 1On 23 March 2012, Jagjit Singh commenced these proceedings by summons in which he sought the following relief: "(1) That District Court Case No 2011/271370 be transferred to the Supreme Court of New South Wales; (2) That the Local Court be directed to set aside the Default Judgment entered on 6 May 2011 on the basis that it is incorrect as the bifurcation provided does not total the amount awarded; (3) That the Plaintiff not be penalized for any proceedings after the entry of the default judgment on 6 May 2011; and (4) That the Federal Magistrates Court Proceedings Case No SYG 2032 of 2011 be stopped." 2The Owners - Strata Plan 11723 (the defendant) seeks an order that the summons be dismissed on the ground that this Court has no jurisdiction to grant the relief claimed. 3The matter came before me as Duty Judge. I acceded to the defendant's request that it be determined expeditiously. Evidence was adduced and submissions made on 16 May 2012 and I reserved my decision. 4The plaintiff tendered a small bundle of documents which comprised correspondence between him and the Local Court, the District Court and the Attorney-General's Department. He made detailed oral submissions, which, on several occasions, addressed the merits (or lack thereof) of the judgment entered against him and his wife in the Local Court. 5The defendant read the affidavit of Sylvia Quang sworn 16 May 2012, and relied on a folder of exhibits to that affidavit, from which the narrative of the various proceedings set out below is derived. The defendant relied on an outline of written submissions, on which Ms Quang, who appeared for the defendant, elaborated, as required, in the oral hearing.