Lincoln International Pty Ltd & Anor v Peter St James & Anor [2003] NSWIRComm 1

Lincoln International Pty Ltd & Anor v Peter St James & Anor [2003] NSWIRComm 1

Although the respondents' explanations for late filing were unsatisfactory and the respondents were not deserving of an extension of time, the Court allowed reliance on the affidavit material filed on 1 October 2002 for the pragmatic reason that refusing leave would likely produce an appeal and further delay the proceedings; the respondents were ordered to pay the applicants' costs forthwith because the need for the application was caused solely by the respondents.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 January 2003
Procedural Posture
Application Under S 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Judgment on Notice of Motion in Interlocutory Case Management Proceedings
Outcome
Respondents permitted to rely on affidavit material filed on 1 October 2002, with costs ordered in favour of the applicants.
Legal Topics
['case Management' 'extension of Time' 'affidavit Evidence Filed Out of Time' 'particulars' 'costs']
['industrial Relations' 'practice and Procedure'] ['case Management' 'extension of Time' 'affidavit Evidence Filed Out of Time' 'particulars' 'costs']

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

Application Under S 106 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 / Judgment on Notice of Motion in Interlocutory Case Management Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the respondents should be precluded from relying on affidavit material filed after the time limited by the Court's order of 9 September 2002." 'Whether sanctions should be imposed for late provision of particulars.' 'Whether the applicants should receive costs of the interlocutory proceedings and how those costs should be assessed.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the respondents' explanations for late filing were unsatisfactory and the respondents were not deserving of an extension of time, the Court allowed reliance on the affidavit material filed on 1 October 2002 for the pragmatic reason that refusing leave would likely produce an appeal and further delay the proceedings; the respondents were ordered to pay the applicants' costs forthwith because the need for the application was caused solely by the respondents.

Court Disposition

Respondents permitted to rely on affidavit material filed on 1 October 2002, with costs ordered in favour of the applicants.

Orders

  • ['The respondents are entitled to rely on the affidavit material filed on 1 October 2002, but no other material without leave of the Court.' "The respondents are to pay the applicants' costs of these interlocutory proceedings assessed by the Court in default of agreement. Such costs are payable forthwith." 'Liberty...