Cases and authorities

LAND LAW – Caveats – Extension of operation of caveats – where caveats claim interests based on bad faith by mortgagee in exercising its power of sale – where bad faith alleged in relation to mortgagee’s removal of property from auction and decision to sell to third party – caveats ordered to be withdrawn

CONTRACTS – construction and interpretation of contracts – parties entered into Deed of Put and Call Option in respect of property owned by defendants – Deed defined Call Option Expiry Date as 5.00pm on 24 April 2021 unless contrary intention appears – form of contract annexed to Deed – Clause 21.5 of the form of contract stipulated that if the time for something to be done is not a business day, the time is extended to the next business day – 24 April 2021 was not a business day as defined in form of contract – whether clause 21.5 evinces a contrary intention that warrants departure from the defined meaning of Call Option Expiry Date – held that ordinary businesspeople would understand that the terms of the form of contract would operate only if either the call option or put option was exercised – held that on the true construction of the Deed the Call Option Expiry Date was 5.00pm on 24 April 2021 – plaintiffs in any event failed to pay deposit by cheque as required by the Deed – held that plaintiffs failed to validly exercise call option

CORPORATIONS – Schemes of arrangement or compromise – Application under s 411 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) for orders convening meeting of creditors and members to consider schemes of arrangement.

CORPORATIONS — Members’ rights and remedies — Membership of company — Where no evidence that company maintains register of members — Where no evidence of valid share transfer — Whether plaintiff remains a shareholder of the company — Whether Court can order that company’s register of members be corrected under Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 175 — Whether declaratory relief should be given — Whether other relief could be ordered on terms. CORPORATIONS — Management and administration — Application for inspection of books under Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) s 198F — Whether requirements for order are satisfied.

CRIME – Confiscations – Forfeiture order – Application to exclude interest in property – Drug offences – Cultivate prohibited plant – Whether property on which prohibited plants were cultivated constitutes “serious crime use property” pursuant to s 9B of Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1900 (NSW) – Statutory interpretation – Extrinsic materials – Legislative history and cognate legislation in other States – Whether property was “used in, or in connection with” the cultivation of a prohibited plant

EQUITY — Fiduciary duties — Breach — Rule in Barnes v Addy — Whether liability of fiduciaries and knowing assistants is joint and several — Whether Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), s 95 abrogates joint liability — Whether the release rule applies in equity — Causation EQUITY — Trusts and trustees — Express trusts — Quistclose trusts — Intention to create — Illegality CORPORATIONS — Directors and officers —Whether de facto or shadow director — Directors’ duties — Duty not to use position as director or officer improperly — Duty of care and diligence — Duty to act in good faith in the best interests of company and for proper purpose — Whether knowledge of officers or employees can be attributed to corporation — Persons involved in a contravention under s 79 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) — Liability for breach of directors’ duties CORPORATIONS — Winding up — Uncommercial transactions — Unreasonable director-related transactions— Insolvency of company — Voidable transactions RESTITUTION — Nature of restitutionary liability — Common counts — Money had and received — Unjust enrichment — Payment out without authority

CIVIL — forfeiture of proceeds of crime — applications for exclusion from restraining and possible forfeiture orders — no pending allegation of criminality against any applicant — examination orders made by consent against applicants — examination notice requires production of many classes of documents pertaining to extended period — whether Court has power to “whittle down” examination notice — statutory power to stay examination order distinguished — clarification of examination order distinguished — no power to reduce scope of examination notice established by applicants — contingent analyses

CIVIL PROCEDURE – application for leave to appeal from an interlocutory decision of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of NSW – where Tribunal refused to grant the applicant an extension of time in which to appeal from a decision of the Medical Council of NSW, which had imposed a condition on the applicant’s registration as a health practitioner that she not practise medicine – where applicant sought to appeal the Medical Council’s decision over one year after it provided its reasons for imposing the relevant condition – where applicant contended that her appeal was as of right and that no extension of time was required to be granted by the Tribunal – whether Tribunal was correct to hold that an extension of time within which to appeal from the Council’s decision was required – whether Tribunal’s discretion miscarried in refusing the applicant an extension of time HEALTH – medical professionals – whether Medical Council of NSW had the power to impose a temporary condition that a practitioner not practise medicine – where such a power is found under s 150(1)(b) of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (NSW) PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Procedural fairness – whether there had been a breach of procedural fairness by the Medical Council of NSW in conducting a hearing pursuant to s 150 of the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (NSW) in the applicant’s absence – whether there was a breach of procedural fairness in the Council denying the applicant’s request for an adjournment of that hearing – where applicant had been given sufficient notice of the hearing and where her application for an adjournment was raised only a day before the hearing was scheduled – where Tribunal was correct to conclude that there was no breach of procedural fairness by the Council

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – judicial review – orders of District Court dismissing appeal on questions of law from costs assessment review panel – where District Court decided reasons given by review panel were adequate – whether jurisdictional error in applying incorrect test for adequacy of reasons – whether error of law on the face of the record in relation to decision that reasons adequate COSTS – costs assessment – determination by review panel of amount of costs of assessment process and by whom payable – whether review panel required to determine “fair and reasonable amount”

COURTS – Land and Environment Court (NSW) – jurisdiction and powers – class 3 jurisdiction – assessment of value of land compulsorily acquired – enforcement of statutory obligation to pay 90% of Valuer General’s assessment pending resolution of claim – power to make freezing order LAND LAW – compulsory acquisition of land – payment required by Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 (NSW), s 68(2)(a) – whether payment into trust account of acquiring authority’s solicitor satisfied obligation

COSTS — Civil and Administrative Tribunal — disciplinary proceedings — costs incurred by a lawyer in defending allegations of professional misconduct — application for payment of costs from the Public Purpose Fund following successful appeal — statutory requirement for the Court to be satisfied that the lawyer did not engage in unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct — where solicitor admitted professional misconduct but on a basis not alleged by the Legal Services Commissioner in the proceedings before the Tribunal — proper construction of sch 5, cl 23(3) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act

SUCCESSION – contested probate – knowledge and approval – suspicious circumstances - significance of reading out will to capable testator – whether reading out will to capable testator who executes it will discharge onus on propounder – whether sufficient to establish knowledge of contents of will or whether it may be necessary to establish knowledge of its effect – consideration of Tobin v Ezekiel (2012) 83 NSWLR 757; [2012] NSWCA 285 – consideration of “mistake doctrine” – significance of statutory power to rectify wills SUCCESSION – contested probate – severance of testamentary instruments – power to admit only those clauses to probate of which testator has been shown to have known and approved – distinction between omitted clauses which confer bequests and omitted clauses which confer power – Osborne v Smith (1960) 105 CLR 153; [1960] HCA 89 considered and explained SUBPOENAS – production of documents – redaction of parts of documents on ground of relevance – distinction between redaction for privilege and redaction for relevance

APPEALS — procedure — application for joinder after appeal decision handed down — applicants interested in appeal who took no part in appeal — court’s power to preclude party from litigation without res judicata or issue estoppel — factors warranting APPEALS — procedure — application to reopen for adducing further evidence — special grounds — curing factual misapprehension — exercise of court’s discretion — variation of orders to cure misapprehension VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS — unincorporated and incorporated associations — effect of incorporation — relationship between unincorporated and incorporated associations — complex structure of incorporated and unincorporated associations on local, state and national levels — incorporation of a unit that was subordinate to an unincorporated association — construction of rules and constitution

CRIME – Appeals – Appeal against sentence – Maintenance of unlawful sexual relationship with a child contrary to s 66EA(1) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) – Error in finding as to aggravating factors - Appeal allowed

CRIME – appeals – appeal against conviction – miscarriage of justice – joint trial – whether failure to order a separate trial resulted in a substantial miscarriage of justice – where evidence tendered was admissible against one co-accused but not the other –whether applicant deprived of a real chance of acquittal – Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), s 29(2)

CRIME — appeal against conviction — offences in company — sexual intercourse without consent — reckless infliction of actual bodily harm — question of where injury properly available to satisfy elements of actual bodily harm of s 61J(1) Crimes Act — absence of medical evidence — failure of Crown to particularise injury relevant to each charged count — where injury attributable to sexual act — question of inconsistent verdicts — use of expert pharmacological evidence to prove absence of consent — where Crown Prosecutor’s closing address conflated intoxicated and incapacity to give consent CRIME — appeal against sentence — asserted errors in findings of fact — question of correctness of assessment of objective gravity of offences — question of manifest excess — use to be made of “comparable” sentencing cases by which to establish error

CRIMINAL LAW – sentence – appeal against severity of sentence – firearms offences – whether sentencing judge erred in assessment of objective seriousness of offences – where sentencing judge held that there was no basis for finding that a shotgun had been used for purposes of criminal activity – whether sentencing judge erred thereafter by failing to refer to a factor that he did not take into account, namely whether the firearm was intended for use in relation to criminal activity – whether sentencing discretion miscarried – no error demonstrated – leave to appeal refused

CONSUMER LAW – unconscionable conduct – misleading and deceptive conduct TORTS – conversion – deceit – negligent misstatement

CIVIL PROCEDURE – Uniform Civil Procedure Rules (“UCPR”), r 55.9 - money paid into Court after the sale of a car parking space under powers conferred on the local council (“the Council”) under Local Government Act 1993, s 713 – owner of the car space is a company that was deregistered before the Council’s sale of the car parking space – the Council seeks the deduction of its costs of these proceedings from the funds in Court – persons interested in the deregistered company seek directions for the payment of the funds in Court out to them – persons interested in the deregistered company also foreshadow cross-claims against the Council – should the funds in Court be paid out and if so to whom – what direction should be given in the short-term.

CIVIL PROCEDURE — Pleadings — Matter arising after commencement of proceedings — Where the primary proceedings have been heard and determined — Where in the course of determining the primary proceedings the Court made findings on the evidence before it to the effect that the plaintiff may have a right of subrogation — Where the plaintiff now contends that the Court should make orders giving effect to that right of subrogation — Where that was not relief sought by the plaintiff in her summons or statement of claim — Where an interested defendant may not have been given notice with respect to the subrogation claim — Where the Court held that the plaintiff must amend her statement of claim, serve it on the interested defendant and give him an opportunity to inform the Court whether he wishes to defend the claim COSTS — Party/Party — Costs orders in interlocutory proceedings — Where the plaintiffs filed three notices of motion and the defendant filed one notice of motion — Where the plaintiffs submitted that all four motions should be dismissed but that the defendant pay the plaintiffs’ costs of the motions on the indemnity basis — Where the defendant submitted that two of the plaintiffs’ motions should be dismissed and did not deal with the third — Where the Court dismissed the plaintiffs’ motions — Where the Court held that the plaintiffs should pay the defendant’s costs of one motion on the indemnity basis because that motion was entirely misconceived and the costs of another motion on the ordinary basis

COSTS – security for costs of cross-claim – whether applicant has established likely costs of cross-claim – whether reason to believe cross-claimant is unable to pay costs – whether personal undertakings of director and shareholder should be accepted

HIGH RISK OFFENDERS — extended supervision orders — incorporation of findings made in undisputed preliminary judgment — elderly defendant proceeding reasonably well on conditional liberty — three separate homicides committed by defendant over a period of more than two decades — established proclivity to inflict fatal harm— two-year extended supervision order imposed — dispute about conditions resolved very largely in favour of rigour

CRIMINAL LAW – Offences – Application for leave to appeal against sentence – Where applicant pleaded guilty to various offences including four counts of indecent assault – Where the Crown provided a sentence summary to the sentencing judge asserting that the offending was aggravated by the fact that the applicant was subject to conditional liberty at the time – Where a concession to that effect was made by counsel for the applicant – Where that concession was contradicted by a further submission made by counsel for the applicant – Where the resulting confusion was left unresolved – Where Crown determined prior to sentence being passed that its position on sentence was an error but failed to draw that to the attention of the sentencing judge until after sentence had been passed – Where sentencing judge found that the offending was aggravated based upon the Crown’s submissions – Whether applicant should be permitted to resile from the concession made at first instance – Whether miscarriage of justice established – Error established – No lesser sentence warranted – Observations as to the necessity for practitioners to ensure that sentence proceedings are properly conducted and not in a manner which has the capacity to lead a sentencing judge into error

CONTRACTS – termination – breach of term – what constitutes gross negligence and gross misconduct CONTRACTS – termination – breach of term – implied term – term implied in fact – implied term not to use position to obtain unauthorised benefit – where breach compounded by deliberate deception – gross misconduct CONTRACTS – termination – breach by terminating party – whether repudiation of contract – whether acceptance of repudiation possible – whether party willing to perform obligations under the contract CONTRACTS – construction – interpretation – natural and ordinary meaning – no ambiguity – unusual term – Court must give effect to the language used STATUTORY INTERPRETATION – text, context and purpose of provisions and the mischief they are intended to remedy – Strata Schemes Management Act 1996 (NSW) – Strata Schemes Management Amendment Act 2002 (NSW) – Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 (NSW) – extrinsic material – where purpose of relevant provisions emerges from the Second Reading Speech – savings provisions – Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW) s 30

Administrative law – Migration – Application for Safe Haven Enterprise Visa ("visa") – Where first delegate of Minister held delegation to make decision under s 65 but not s 501 of Migration Act 1958 (Cth) to consider plaintiff's application for visa – Where referral process required first delegate to refer plaintiff's application to "Visa Applicant Character Consideration Unit" for character checks – Where second delegate of Minister refused to grant visa on character grounds pursuant to s 501 – Where Administrative Appeals Tribunal set aside decision of second delegate and decided that discretion under s 501 should not be exercised to preclude plaintiff's application for visa – Where Minister made personal decision under s 501A(2)(a) to set aside Tribunal's decision and substitute decision to refuse to grant visa – Whether internal departmental processes and policies unlawful – Whether referral process unlawful – Whether public interest criterion 4001 in Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) invalid – Whether Minister came under duty under s 65 to grant visa – Whether second delegate had power to make decision under s 501 – Whether Administrative Appeals Tribunal had power to set aside decision by second delegate – Whether Minister had power to make decision under s 501A(2)(a). High Court – Original jurisdiction – Practice and procedure – Application for constitutional and other writs, injunctions, declarations, and other relief – Where plaintiff brought parallel proceedings concerning same underlying subject matter in original jurisdiction of High Court and by special leave from Federal Court – Where special leave application dismissed – Where plaintiff could have raised many of grounds in special leave application – Where grounds would have been dismissed – Whether plaintiff's rights of appeal have been exhausted – Whether abuse of process – Anshun estoppel – Insufficient submissions to determine question – Application for extension of time to make further amendments – Last‑minute application – Inefficiency – Delay. Words and phrases – "amendment application", "binary decision", "character test", "criteria for the grant of a SHEV", "duty under s 65", "extension of time", "last‑minute amendment application", "lengthy delay", "original decision", "policy", "public interest criterion 4001", "referral process", "refusal on character grounds", "satisfaction", "single decision", "unlawful detention", "validly prescribed criterion". Migration Act 1958 (Cth), ss 36, 47, 65, 501, 501A. Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth), Sch 2, Pt 790, Sch 4, cl 4001.

CHILD WELFARE — Care proceedings — Care order — Appeal from care order of Children’s Court — Application to stay or set side care order CHILD WELFARE — Care proceedings — Care order — Order to prevent giving of certain medical treatment to child in care without leave of the Court or written consent of the mother CHILD WELFARE — Care proceedings — Contact order CHILD WELFARE — Jurisdiction — Supreme Court of New South Wales — Parens patriae

COSTS — Costs assessment — Gross sum costs order — Where the first defendant sought an order that the plaintiff pay its costs on the indemnity basis and that the amount payable be assessed on a gross sum basis — Where the plaintiff failed to prosecute the proceedings with due despatch — Where the plaintiff’s conduct with respect to the notice of motion was not so unreasonable as to warrant costs being ordered on the indemnity basis — Where the Court ordered that the plaintiff pay the first defendant’s costs on the ordinary basis and assessed the costs on a gross sum basis discounted by 25%

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – Judicial review – Where plaintiff was an inmate in a NSW correctional centre – Where there was evidence establishing that the plaintiff was terminally ill with a life expectancy of between 3 and 6 months – Where plaintiff sought that he be allowed personal visits by his sister – Where Commissioner of Corrective Services determined that no such visits would be permitted – Where plaintiff sought judicial review of that decision – Where the Commissioner revised that decision following the commencement of proceedings so as to permit visits by the plaintiff’s sister via AVL – Where the current circumstances brought about by Covid-19 prohibit personal visits to any inmate – Where the Commissioner’s revised decision therefore gave the plaintiff the same benefit as that given to all inmates – Proceedings dismissed

COSTS — Party/Party — Costs orders in interlocutory proceedings — Where the Court ultimately made orders by consent — Where the plaintiffs contended that the defendants should pay their costs of the motion on the basis that they should have consented at the outset — Where the defendants submitted each party should pay their own costs on the basis that the application was required to obtain the leave of the Court — Where the Court made no order for costs with the intention that the parties bear their own costs

COSTS — Costs assessment — Determination COSTS — Party/Party — Whether should be exception to general rule that costs follow the event — Offers of compromise/Calderbank offers

CIVIL PROCEDURE – parties – vexatious litigants – application to file notice of motion – where motion seeks to challenge orders made in the proceedings under the Vexatious Proceedings Act – whether leave to file should be granted – where applicant had been refused leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal against vexatious proceedings orders – where requirements set out in Vexatious Proceedings Act not met – notice of motion dismissed PROCEDURE – request for referral to a barrister or solicitor on the Pro Bono Panel – Uniform Civil Procedure Rules (NSW) r 7.36 – where applicant has been declared a vexatious litigant – where referral would not be in interests of justice – application dismissed

SUCCESSION — family provision — claim by alleged de facto partner of the deceased for provision from the deceased’s estate under Succession Act 2006 (NSW), Ch 3 — whether eligible person — whether in a de facto relationship at time of death

Evidence – Privilege against self-incrimination – Where appellant obtained ex parte orders freezing worldwide assets of respondent – Where disclosure orders made in connection with freezing orders required disclosure of worldwide assets – Where respondent objected to disclosure of certain information on basis that it may tend to self-incriminate – Where respondent prepared privilege affidavit under s 128A(2) of Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) – Whether information in privilege affidavit could be disclosed to parties under s 128A(6) – Whether interests of justice required disclosure of information in privilege affidavit. Words and phrases – "certificate", "commission of a foreign offence", "disclosure order", "freezing order", "interests of justice", "may tend to prove", "onus of proof", "privilege affidavit", "privilege against self-incrimination", "reasonable grounds for an objection". Evidence Act 1995 (Cth), ss 128, 128A. Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), rr 7.32, 7.33.

Industrial law (Cth) – Contract of employment – Nature of casual employment – Where first respondent employed by appellant labour-hire company under series of six employment contracts or "assignments" – Where first respondent treated as casual employee – Where first respondent not paid entitlements owed by employers to non‑casual employees – Where first respondent claimed to have been other than a casual employee – Where first respondent's work pattern followed established shift structure fixed long in advance by roster – Where employment contract provided that employment was on "assignment-by-assignment basis" – Where employment contract provided that appellant under no obligation to offer first respondent further assignments – Whether there existed firm advance commitment as to duration of first respondent's employment or days (or hours) first respondent will work – Whether first respondent employed as casual employee. Words and phrases – "annual leave", "assignment-by-assignment basis", "binding contractual terms", "casual employee", "compassionate leave", "employment contract wholly in writing", "enterprise agreement", "firm advance commitment", "label", "mere expectation of continuing employment", "National Employment Standards", "nature of the employment relationship", "payment for public holidays", "personal/carer's leave", "post-contractual conduct", "regular and systematic basis", "roster". Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), Pt 2-2.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW — Judicial review — Decision of State Parole Authority — Standing over review of decision to revoke intensive correction order — Whether denial of procedural fairness — Whether predominant weight given to community protection — s 175 Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW)

COSTS – party/party – general rule that costs follow the event – application of the rule and discretion in relation to dispute regarding freezing orders – no issue of principle

CRIMINAL LAW – murder – Judge issues surveillance device warrant – conversation recorded under warrant relied upon by Crown as alleged admissions – pretrial application to exclude evidence of admissions – whether Judge who issued warrant should decline to sit at pretrial hearing and as trial Judge – reasonable apprehension of bias – Judge recuses himself from pretrial hearing and trial

CIVIL PROCEDURE — Originating process — Amendment — No issue of principle EQUITY — Equitable remedies — Injunctions — Adequacy of undertaking as to damages — No issue of principle

COSTS — Party/Party — Indemnity costs.

COSTS – Where plaintiffs made application to the defendant for the transfer of gaming machine entitlements – Application made on 14 May 2020 – Application undetermined as at 24 December 2020 – Where plaintiffs brought proceedings on that day seeking relief in the nature of mandamus – Where defendant subsequently granted the applications unconditionally – No issue left for determination leading the plaintiffs to discontinue the proceedings – Whether plaintiffs should have their costs – Significant delays on the part of the defendant in determining the applications – Where the defendant had been put on notice of commencement of proceedings – Plaintiffs entitled to an order for costs in their favour

CONTRACTS — Construction — Good faith — Implication of terms — Contracts Review Act — Whether unjust in all circumstances DEEDS — Standing to sue — Whether multi-party deed poll or inter partes deed — Trust of benefit of promise EQUITY — Trusts and trustees — Express trusts — Intention to create — Resulting trusts — Presumption of advancement — Secret and half-secret trusts — Fraud on a power — Equitable fraud EQUITY — Equitable defences — Unconscionable Conduct — Undue influence — Yerkey v Jones — Catching Bargains SUCCESSION — Construction — General principles — Construction of Will and incorporated Deed — Contested probate — Testamentary capacity — Whether knowledge and approval of Will — Whether delusional optimism as to estate — Standing to bring claims on behalf of estate — Doctrine of equitable election SUCCESSION — Executors — Merger/release of Executor — Intermeddling — Executor de son tort — Whether either of named executors in Will should be passed over for misconduct SUCCESSION — Family provision — Claim by adult children

APPEAL – where applicant incorrectly filed an application for leave to appeal – where, although leave to appeal was not required, an extension of time in which to bring the appeal was required – no satisfactory explanation provided for delay in commencing appeal proceedings – where no injustice would be suffered by the applicant if an extension of time to appeal was refused – application for extension of time to appeal refused

NEGLIGENCE – professional negligence – solicitors – where appellant law firm was retained to advise the respondent as to his rights in a family law partnership – whether appellant failed to give competent advice to the respondent about the manner and circumstances of the exercise of a put option granted by a put and call option agreement forming part of the partnership documents – breach of retainer and concurrent duty of care NEGLIGENCE – professional negligence – causation – factual causation – where respondent would have exercised put option had he been properly advised of his rights – where failure to give competent advice caused loss CONSUMER LAW – misleading or deceptive conduct – professional advice – where a dangerously incomplete statement of the respondent’s rights was misleading and deceptive in that it was apt to mislead the respondent into believing that his legal rights were ineffective CONTRACTS – implied terms – terms implied in law – necessity CONTRACTS – implied terms – terms implied in fact – necessary to give business efficacy CONTRACTS – construction – interpretation – calculation of purchase price under formula prescribed in a put and call option agreement APPEALS – damages – where primary judge awarded damages and required an undertaking as to repayment pending the outcome of related proceedings – whether primary judge erred in not assessing damages on a lump sum basis once and for all – whether this Court should itself determine the damages payable on a lump sum basis – approach for correct assessment of damages

COSTS – Calderbank offer at first instance – where offeror would have been unsuccessful at first instance but where Calderbank offer, if accepted, would have resulted in appellant securing a more favourable outcome at first instance than it ultimately obtained as a result of its successful appeal

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – application for orders in the nature of certiorari quashing decision of District Court dismissing an appeal from the Small Claims Division of the Local Court and the decision of the Local Court for jurisdictional error and error of law on the face of the record – where appeal to District Court lies only on basis of lack of jurisdiction or denial of procedural fairness – where applicants contended District Court judge misapprehended the meaning of “lack of jurisdiction”, failed to make a bona fide assessment of the grounds of appeal and failed to give adequate reasons – where applicants’ challenge to the Local Court decision out of time – where applicants contended that Local Court assessor failed to take into account “jurisdictional facts”, gave judgment notwithstanding notice of an alleged counter claim or set-off and otherwise invalidly exercised jurisdiction

CORPORATIONS — Winding up — Whether applicant should be considered a creditor of the company — Question as to whether the whole debt or only principal amount assigned to third party. CORPORATIONS — Winding up — Whether application an abuse of process — Where notice of assignment ambiguous as to whether both principal and interest assigned — Where garnishee orders also made in another court — Where impossible for company to know who to pay in response to creditor’s statutory demand in order to avoid presumption of insolvency and consequential winding up.

CIVIL PROCEDURE — Service — Substituted service — Whether document cannot practicably be served CIVIL PROCEDURE — Service — Deemed or informal service — Documents to be brought to attention of intended recipient by newspaper advertisement

LAND LAW — Caveats — Removal of caveat — Removal by order of court — Whether serious question to be tried

CIVIL PROCEDURE – pleadings – application to strike out Amended Statement of Claim and dismiss proceedings pursuant to rules 14.28 and 13.4 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules – held that Amended Statement of Claim discloses no reasonable cause of action and has a tendency to cause prejudice, embarrassment and delay – order that the Amended Statement of Claim be wholly struck out – plaintiff afforded further opportunity to formulate a pleading which is in an acceptable form

CIVIL PROCEDURE – interlocutory application – withdrawal of solicitor – where the application was made less than 28 days from the hearing date – where withdrawal would leave the plaintiff company unrepresented – application refused