Hewit v Galletta [2017] NSWDC 129

The plaintiff's application for preliminary discovery was refused because he failed to provide evidence of reasonable enquiries, had already received the relevant documents, and failed to identify a sufficient underlying cause of action, as a 'declaration of right' is not itself a cause of action. The amended summons should be dismissed.

Parties: Plaintiff: Alan Hewit; Defendant: Anthony J Galletta
Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 05 May 2017
Procedural Posture: Civil / Ruling on Preliminary Discovery and Strike Out Application
Outcome: Amended Summons dismissed with costs to the defendant. Notice of motion also dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics: Preliminary Discovery, Defamation, Declaration of Right, Summary Disposal

Tort Preliminary Discovery Defamation Declaration of Right Summary Disposal

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2

Parties

Alan Hewit

Plaintiff

Anthony J Galletta

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ruling on Preliminary Discovery and Strike Out Application

Legal Issues

1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to preliminary discovery under UCPR r 5.3
2 Whether a claim described as a 'declaration of right' constitutes an underlying cause of action
3 Whether the proceedings should be summarily dismissed

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Amended Summons dismissed with costs to the defendant. Notice of motion also dismissed with costs.

Orders

Amended Summons dismissed.
Plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs.