Lake Macquarie Conveyancing Pty Ltd v Carr [2021] NSWSC 1295
As the proceedings were commenced and carried on without full compliance with the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), specifically rr 7.1 and 7.2 (as neither Mr Whitehall nor any director with a personal cause of action was named as a plaintiff, nor were the required affidavits filed at commencement), and there being no exceptional circumstances justifying a departure from these rules, the Court held that the first plaintiff must be given a final opportunity to obtain independent legal representation. The proceedings were stayed for 28 days to permit this, with liberty to the defendants to have the matter dismissed if no solicitor appears within that period.
- Parties
- First Plaintiff: Lake Macquarie Conveyancing Pty Ltd; Second Plaintiff: Lorraine Berry; First Defendant: Amanda May Carr; Second Defendant: Brett Richmond Carr; Third Defendant: 3C Conveyancing Pty Ltd (Deregistered)
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 28 September 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Equity Application (duty List) / Interlocutory Application; Orders Following Motion by Defendants Regarding Representation and Compliance With Procedural Rules
- Outcome
- Proceedings stayed for 28 days to allow first plaintiff to engage independent legal representation. Liberty to the defendants to move to dismiss if no notice of appearance is filed within 28 days. Plaintiffs ordered to pay defendants' costs of the motion.
- Legal Topics
- Company Representation in Proceedings, Constructive Trusts, Interlocutory Relief, Caveats Over Land
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Lake Macquarie Conveyancing Pty Ltd
First Plaintiff
Lorraine Berry
Second Plaintiff
Amanda May Carr
First Defendant
Brett Richmond Carr
Second Defendant
3C Conveyancing Pty Ltd (Deregistered)
Third Defendant
Procedural Posture
Equity Application (duty List) / Interlocutory Application; Orders Following Motion by Defendants Regarding Representation and Compliance With Procedural Rules
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether proceedings were properly commenced and carried on by a director not named as a plaintiff under Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) rr 7.1-7.2;
- 2 Whether leave should be granted for a company director to represent the company in Supreme Court proceedings;
- 3 Compliance with procedural rules as to director affidavits and personal causes of action;
Ratio Decidendi
As the proceedings were commenced and carried on without full compliance with the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), specifically rr 7.1 and 7.2 (as neither Mr Whitehall nor any director with a personal cause of action was named as a plaintiff, nor were the required affidavits filed at commencement), and there being no exceptional circumstances justifying a departure from these rules, the Court held that the first plaintiff must be given a final opportunity to obtain independent legal representation. The proceedings were stayed for 28 days to permit this, with liberty to the defendants to have the matter dismissed if no solicitor appears within that period.
Court Disposition
Proceedings stayed for 28 days to allow first plaintiff to engage independent legal representation. Liberty to the defendants to move to dismiss if no notice of appearance is filed within 28 days. Plaintiffs ordered to pay defendants' costs of the motion.
Orders
- Stay the proceedings for 28 days to permit the first plaintiff to engage and retain independent legal representatives to act on behalf of the first plaintiff in the proceedings.
- Grant liberty to the defendants, if a notice of appearance by a solicitor on behalf of the first plaintiff is not filed within 28 days, to move to have the summons dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment