Cogent Nominees Pty Ltd v Anthony [2004] NSWSC 1094

Cogent Nominees Pty Ltd v Anthony [2004] NSWSC 1094

The Court made orders consequent on settlement because the relevant parties consented to the orders as slightly altered and those alterations did not vary their agreement. Order 10 of short minutes (1) was acceptable because it did not create an irreversible self-executing situation: if the plaintiffs sought to enter or enforce orders against the third defendant, the third defendant could apply for a stay or directions and have any contested conditions adjudicated.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 November 2004
Procedural Posture
Supreme Court of New South Wales Equity Division Proceedings / Orders Consequent on Settlement
Outcome
Orders made consequent on settlement; proceedings against the ninth defendant and reserved matters concerning Sagacious Legal Pty Limited stood over to 15 November 2004.
Legal Topics
['consent Orders' 'settlement' 'self Executing Orders' 'stay of Proceedings' 'mareva Relief']
['civil Procedure' 'equity'] ['consent Orders' 'settlement' 'self Executing Orders' 'stay of Proceedings' 'mareva Relief']

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

Supreme Court of New South Wales Equity Division Proceedings / Orders Consequent on Settlement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether orders should be made to give effect to settlements between the plaintiffs and all defendants except the ninth defendant.' 'Whether order 10 of short minutes (1) created an inappropriate self-executing order.' 'How the remaining proceedings against the ninth defendant and reserved matters concerning Sagacious Legal Pty Limited should proceed.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court made orders consequent on settlement because the relevant parties consented to the orders as slightly altered and those alterations did not vary their agreement. Order 10 of short minutes (1) was acceptable because it did not create an irreversible self-executing situation: if the plaintiffs sought to enter or enforce orders against the third defendant, the third defendant could apply for a stay or directions and have any contested conditions adjudicated.

Court Disposition

Orders made consequent on settlement; proceedings against the ninth defendant and reserved matters concerning Sagacious Legal Pty Limited stood over to 15 November 2004.

Orders

  • ['Orders were made by reference to the short minutes and forms of order laid before the Court, with slight alterations made with the consent of the relevant parties.' 'Liberty to apply was included in short minutes (1) and short minutes (3).' 'The proceedings against the ninth defendant were stood over to Monday, 15...