Plaza Carpark Pty Ltd v Chor Shing Ma (No 2) [2010] FCA 1139

Plaza Carpark Pty Ltd v Chor Shing Ma (No 2) [2010] FCA 1139

The Court held that the inclusion of the second respondent's joint liability in orders 7 and 13 was not an accidental slip or omission but rather reflected the case as presented by the applicants and the findings in the reasons for judgment. There was no error of the kind contemplated by O 35 r 7(3), so the application to correct the orders was refused, save for correcting a minor typographical error.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 October 2010
Procedural Posture
Application (slip Rule) / Post Judgment, Application to Correct Orders Under O 35 R 7(3)
Outcome
Application to amend orders refused (except for minor typographical correction).
Legal Topics
['slip Rule' 'correction of Orders' 'equitable Compensation']
['civil Procedure'] ['slip Rule' 'correction of Orders' 'equitable Compensation']

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 (slip Rule) / Post Judgment, Application to Correct Orders Under O 35 R 7(3)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the orders made on 1 June 2010 contained errors arising from accidental slip or omission justifying correction under Order 35 rule 7(3) of the Federal Court Rules.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the inclusion of the second respondent's joint liability in orders 7 and 13 was not an accidental slip or omission but rather reflected the case as presented by the applicants and the findings in the reasons for judgment. There was no error of the kind contemplated by O 35 r 7(3), so the application to correct the orders was refused, save for correcting a minor typographical error.

Court Disposition

Application to amend orders refused (except for minor typographical correction).

Orders

  • ['The application by the respondents pursuant to Order 35 rule 7(3) of the Federal Court Rules is refused.' 'The respondents pay to the applicants the costs of the application.' "Order 3 to be corrected by substituting 'his' for 'its'."]