Nguyen v Sage Consultant Group Pty Ltd; Dang v Nguyen (No 3) [2022] NSWSC 515

Nguyen v Sage Consultant Group Pty Ltd; Dang v Nguyen (No 3) [2022] NSWSC 515

The Court's inherent jurisdiction empowers it to order removal of a caveat and grant injunctions to prevent frustration of its orders, even when the applicant lacks statutory standing under the Real Property Act, if the caveat operates to impede enforcement of a judgment, the caveator fails to substantiate a genuine, immediate caveatable interest, and balance of convenience so warrants. The Court refuses summary judgment (as to the note/fabrication) but grants mandatory and prohibitive injunctions requiring withdrawal of Mr Lam's caveat and restraining new caveats, and preserves freezing order against Mr Hoang. Mr Hoang's application to set aside judgment is dismissed as it disclosed no...

Parties
Respondent/first Plaintiff: Van Tuan Nguyen; Respondent/second Plaintiff: Phuong Anh Nguyen; Respondent/third Plaintiff: Ngoc Tu Nguyen; First Defendant: Sage Consultant Group Pty Ltd; Applicant/second Defendant: Quoc Dung Hoang; Third Defendant: Thu Thuy Dang; Fourth Defendant: Kennie Thanh Khoi Nguyen; Fifth Defendant: Sherriff of New South Wales; Plaintiff (2019/00296623): Thu Thuy Dang; Applicant/first Defendant/first Cross Claimant (2019/00296623): Van Tuan Nguyen; Applicant/second Defendant/second Cross Claimant (2019/00296623): Phuong Anh Nguyen; Applicant/third Defendant/third Cross Claimant (2019/00296623): Ngoc Tu Nguyen; Respondent/fourth Defendant/first Cross Defendant (2019/00296623): Quoc Dung Hoang; Fifth Defendant (2019/00296623): Registrar-General of New South Wales; Respondent/second Cross Defendant: Van Dung Lam
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Equity Proceedings – Caveat/interlocutory Application / Post Judgment Applications; Consideration of Motions for Withdrawal of Caveat and to Set Aside Judgment
Outcome
Notice of motion by Nguyens against Mr Lam (re caveat): summary judgment declaration refused; mandatory and prohibitive injunctions granted; costs costs-in-cause. Notice of motion by Mr Hoang to set aside judgment: dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Caveats – Removal of Caveat, Court's Power to Order Withdrawal of Caveat, Standing to Seek Removal of Caveat, Summary Judgment, Procedures for Enforcement of Judgment, Setting Aside Summary Judgment
Land Law Civil Procedure Equity Caveats – Removal of Caveat Court's Power to Order Withdrawal of Caveat Standing to Seek Removal of Caveat Summary Judgment Procedures for Enforcement of Judgment +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Van Tuan Nguyen

Respondent/first Plaintiff

Phuong Anh Nguyen

Respondent/second Plaintiff

Ngoc Tu Nguyen

Respondent/third Plaintiff

Sage Consultant Group Pty Ltd

First Defendant

Quoc Dung Hoang

Applicant/second Defendant

Thu Thuy Dang

Third Defendant

Kennie Thanh Khoi Nguyen

Fourth Defendant

Sherriff of New South Wales

Fifth Defendant

Thu Thuy Dang

Plaintiff (2019/00296623)

Van Tuan Nguyen

Applicant/first Defendant/first Cross Claimant (2019/00296623)

Phuong Anh Nguyen

Applicant/second Defendant/second Cross Claimant (2019/00296623)

Ngoc Tu Nguyen

Applicant/third Defendant/third Cross Claimant (2019/00296623)

Quoc Dung Hoang

Respondent/fourth Defendant/first Cross Defendant (2019/00296623)

Registrar-General of New South Wales

Fifth Defendant (2019/00296623)

Van Dung Lam

Respondent/second Cross Defendant

Procedural Posture

Equity Proceedings – Caveat/interlocutory Application / Post Judgment Applications; Consideration of Motions for Withdrawal of Caveat and to Set Aside Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court has the power to order withdrawal of a caveat by a non-party caveator when applicants lack standing under Real Property Act 1900 (NSW) s 74MA
  2. 2 Whether the inherent jurisdiction of the Court extends to ordering withdrawal of caveat and/or injunctions when court process is frustrated
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment should be entered declaring the Promissory Note/caveat a fabrication

Ratio Decidendi

The Court's inherent jurisdiction empowers it to order removal of a caveat and grant injunctions to prevent frustration of its orders, even when the applicant lacks statutory standing under the Real Property Act, if the caveat operates to impede enforcement of a judgment, the caveator fails to substantiate a genuine, immediate caveatable interest, and balance of convenience so warrants. The Court refuses summary judgment (as to the note/fabrication) but grants mandatory and prohibitive injunctions requiring withdrawal of Mr Lam's caveat and restraining new caveats, and preserves freezing order against Mr Hoang. Mr Hoang's application to set aside judgment is dismissed as it disclosed no...

Court Disposition

Notice of motion by Nguyens against Mr Lam (re caveat): summary judgment declaration refused; mandatory and prohibitive injunctions granted; costs costs-in-cause. Notice of motion by Mr Hoang to set aside judgment: dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Mr Lam to lodge Withdrawal of Caveat AR331007 within 7 days; if not, Registrar to do so under Court seal.
  • Mr Lam restrained from lodging further caveat without leave.