NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Stokes (by a tutor) v McCourt [2013] NSWSC 1014 Hearing dates: 17 May 2013 Decision date: 31 July 2013 Jurisdiction: Equity Division Before: Lindsay J Decision: (1) The defendant's summary disposal application dismissed. (2) The defendant refused leave to rely upon an "Amended Defence" filed without leave. (3) Costs orders made in favour of the plaintiff. Catchwords: PROCEDURE - Civil - Judgments and orders - Contempt of court - Practice - Whether contemnor can be heard in own cause before purging contempt
PROCEDURE - Civil - Judgments and orders - Effect of judgment - Estoppel by judgment - Res Judicata - Issue estoppel - Anshun estoppel - Abuse of process - Consideration upon application for summary disposal of second proceedings - Whether entitlement to rely on a res judicata defence can be lost by a failure to plead - Waiver - Estoppel Legislation Cited: Property (Relationships) Act 1984 NSW Property Law Act 1974 QLD Contracts Review Act 1980 NSW Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 NSW Supreme Court Rules 1970 NSW Family Provision Act 1982 NSW Succession Act 2006 NSW Family Law Act 1975 CTH Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 QLD Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross Vesting) Act 1987 NSW, s 4(3) Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross Vesting) Act 1987 QLD, s 9. Cases Cited: VTMVS v MREM [2009] QSC 393 Permewan Wright Consolidated Pty Ltd v Attorney General (NSW) (1978) 35 NSWLR 365 at 369 and 374 Young v Jackman (1986) 7 NSWLR 97; 102B; 101D-E KP Cable Investments Pty Limited v Meltglow Pty Limited (1995) 56 FCR 189 at 206C-G X Limited v Morgan-Grampian (Publishers) Limited [1991] 1 AC 1 at 46B-H, 50H and 55E-F; 45 E-F In the marriage of Fahmi (1995) 19 Fam LR 517 at 525; AN v Zhu [2006] Fam CA 179; (2006) FLC 93-257; 198 FLR 152 at [79] and [120]-[123] Leaway v Newcastle City Council (No 2) [2005] NSWSC 826; 220 ALR 757; at [52], [59]-[60] and [87]). Kayserian Nominees (No. 1) Pty Ltd v JR Garner Pty Ltd [2008] NSWSC 1011 at [1]-[3] Chuck v Cremer (1846) 1 Coop t Cott 205; 47 ER 820 at 820 Hadkinson v Hadkinson [1952] P285 at 288; 289 Permewan Wright Consolidated Pty Limited v Attorney General (1994) 35 NSWLR 365 at 367B, 369C and 374C
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