Warner v Wong, in the matter of Bellpac Pty Limited (Receivers and Managers Appointed) (In Liq) (No 4) [2015] FCA 369

Warner v Wong, in the matter of Bellpac Pty Limited (Receivers and Managers Appointed) (In Liq) (No 4) [2015] FCA 369

Mr Wong's late filing of a defence and attempt to rely on submissions after trial conclusion, without sufficient justification or explanation, amounted to an abuse of process. The Court exercised its powers under rule 2.28 to remove his defence from the file and refused him leave to rely on the written submissions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Directions/interlocutory Application / Post Hearing, Before Final Judgment
Outcome
Defence removed; application for leave to rely on written submissions refused; costs in the cause
Legal Topics
['abuse of Process' 'filing and Acceptance of Defence' 'late Filings' 'leave to Rely on Submissions']
['civil Procedure'] ['abuse of Process' 'filing and Acceptance of Defence' 'late Filings' 'leave to Rely on Submissions']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Directions/interlocutory Application / Post Hearing, Before Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Mr Wong should be granted leave to rely on a defence filed electronically over two years out of time' 'Whether Mr Wong should be granted leave to rely upon closing submissions annexed to an unsolicited email sent after trial conclusion' 'Whether the actions of Mr Wong constituted an abuse of process']

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Wong's late filing of a defence and attempt to rely on submissions after trial conclusion, without sufficient justification or explanation, amounted to an abuse of process. The Court exercised its powers under rule 2.28 to remove his defence from the file and refused him leave to rely on the written submissions.

Court Disposition

Defence removed; application for leave to rely on written submissions refused; costs in the cause

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to r 2.28(1)(a) and (c) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), the defence of the third defendant, filed electronically on 6 March 2015, be removed from the Court file.' "The third defendant's application for leave to rely upon written submissions annexed to his unsolicited email dated 10 April 2015 be...