Madden v Madden [2014] NSWSC 1098

Madden v Madden [2014] NSWSC 1098

Leave to re-open should be refused because the documents now sought to be tendered were available at the original hearing, any misapprehension of fact or law was due solely to the applicant's neglect, and the further evidence either adds nothing of substance, contradicts evidence already given, or is of little probative value. The significant delay also prejudices the defendants.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 August 2014
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Application for Leave to Re Open After Judgment Prior to Final Orders
Outcome
Application for leave to re-open refused
Legal Topics
['application to Re Open Case' 'procedural Fairness' 'finality of Litigation' 'probative Value of Evidence' 'delay and Prejudice']
['equity'] ['application to Re Open Case' 'procedural Fairness' 'finality of Litigation' 'probative Value of Evidence' 'delay and Prejudice']

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

Interlocutory Application / Application for Leave to Re Open After Judgment Prior to Final Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether plaintiff should be granted leave to re-open his case after judgment pronounced but before final orders entered' 'Whether material sought to be tendered was available at the hearing and whether it is of probative value' 'Whether delay in making the application is prejudicial to the defendants']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to re-open should be refused because the documents now sought to be tendered were available at the original hearing, any misapprehension of fact or law was due solely to the applicant's neglect, and the further evidence either adds nothing of substance, contradicts evidence already given, or is of little probative value. The significant delay also prejudices the defendants.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to re-open refused

Orders

  • ["Plaintiff's notice of motion of 5 June 2014 dismissed with costs." 'Parties granted leave to apply for further mention of the matter.' 'Judge expects parties at the next mention to clarify outstanding issues and proposals for their resolution.' 'Consideration of an application for an order that costs of today be...