Cosmos E-C Commerce Pty Ltd v Bidwell & Associates Pty Ltd [2005] NSWCA 81

Cosmos E-C Commerce Pty Ltd v Bidwell & Associates Pty Ltd [2005] NSWCA 81

The material before the District Court was not so clear and definite as to justify summary judgment. The opponent's claim depended on an alleged agreement, but the evidence raised triable issues about whether an agreement existed, who the parties were, what its terms were, whether it was breached, and whether the explanatory notes were an unequivocal admission of the debt. The primary judge therefore erred in exercising the summary judgment discretion, although he did not err in holding that the belief required by Pt 11A r 2(1)(b) could be inferred from the evidence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal From Interlocutory District Court Orders Striking Out a Defence and Entering Summary Judgment / Court of Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted and appeal allowed.
Legal Topics
['summary Judgment' 'strike Out of Defence' 'general Issue Pleading' 'triable Issues' 'evidence of Belief in No Defence' 'consultancy Services Agreement']
['civil Procedure' 'contract Law'] ['summary Judgment' 'strike Out of Defence' 'general Issue Pleading' 'triable Issues' 'evidence of Belief in No Defence' 'consultancy Services Agreement']

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 for Leave to Appeal and Appeal From Interlocutory District Court Orders Striking Out a Defence and Entering Summary Judgment / Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the primary judge erred in striking out the claimant's grounds of defence as merely raising the general issue and being noncompliant with the rules." 'Whether the material before the District Court disclosed triable issues so that summary judgment should not have been entered.' "Whether Pt 11A r 2(1)(b) of the District Court Rules 1973 required direct evidence of the plaintiff's belief that the defendant had no defence, or whether that belief could be inferred." 'Whether, if the appeal were allowed, the claimant should be ordered to pay the amount claimed into court as a condition.']

Ratio Decidendi

The material before the District Court was not so clear and definite as to justify summary judgment. The opponent's claim depended on an alleged agreement, but the evidence raised triable issues about whether an agreement existed, who the parties were, what its terms were, whether it was breached, and whether the explanatory notes were an unequivocal admission of the debt. The primary judge therefore erred in exercising the summary judgment discretion, although he did not err in holding that the belief required by Pt 11A r 2(1)(b) could be inferred from the evidence.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted and appeal allowed.

Orders

  • ['Leave granted to the opponent to appeal; Notice of Appeal to be filed within seven days.' 'The appeal is allowed.' "The order of Cooper ADCJ striking out the claimant's grounds of defence is set aside." 'The order of Cooper ADCJ giving summary judgment for the opponent is set aside.' 'The order of Cooper ADCJ...