Jamieson & Ors v Madden & Ors [2003] NSWSC 639

Jamieson & Ors v Madden & Ors [2003] NSWSC 639

Leave to proceed was granted and the stay application was dismissed because it was not shown that New South Wales was an inappropriate forum. The related Lukan proceedings were already in New South Wales, relevant witnesses and documents could be dealt with without undue unfairness, any foreign contribution law was not shown to be complicated, the Alberta proceedings were not parallel proceedings between the same parties and would not bind Allens or Gough, and the risk of inconsistent findings did not make the New South Wales proceedings vexatious or oppressive.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 July 2003
Procedural Posture
Notices of Motion for Leave to Proceed Against Foreign Defendants and for the Court to Decline Jurisdiction on Inconvenient Forum Grounds / Interlocutory Motions
Outcome
Leave to proceed granted; the second-named second defendant's motion to decline jurisdiction was dismissed.
Legal Topics
['service Outside Australia' 'leave to Proceed' 'inappropriate Forum' 'forum Non Conveniens' 'contribution and Indemnity' 'vicarious Liability of Partners']
['practice and Procedure' 'private International Law' 'equity'] ['service Outside Australia' 'leave to Proceed' 'inappropriate Forum' 'forum Non Conveniens' 'contribution and Indemnity' 'vicarious Liability of Partners']

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

Notices of Motion for Leave to Proceed Against Foreign Defendants and for the Court to Decline Jurisdiction on Inconvenient Forum Grounds / Interlocutory Motions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be given to proceed against foreign defendants served outside Australia.' 'Whether the Supreme Court of New South Wales was an inappropriate forum for the trial of the proceedings.' 'Whether the existence of Alberta proceedings involving Madden made the New South Wales proceedings vexatious or oppressive because of possible inconsistent findings.' 'Whether the proceedings should be heard with the related Lukan proceedings.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to proceed was granted and the stay application was dismissed because it was not shown that New South Wales was an inappropriate forum. The related Lukan proceedings were already in New South Wales, relevant witnesses and documents could be dealt with without undue unfairness, any foreign contribution law was not shown to be complicated, the Alberta proceedings were not parallel proceedings between the same parties and would not bind Allens or Gough, and the risk of inconsistent findings did not make the New South Wales proceedings vexatious or oppressive.

Court Disposition

Leave to proceed granted; the second-named second defendant's motion to decline jurisdiction was dismissed.

Orders

  • ['On notice of motion of plaintiffs filed 11 September 2002, orders as sought in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of the notice of motion.' 'On the notice of the second-named second defendant filed 17 October 2002, the notice of motion be dismissed.']