Ninan v St George Bank Ltd [2014] FCA 334

Leave to file the proceeding was refused because the proposed proceedings would constitute an abuse of process, seeking to re-litigate substantially the same allegations as previously determined, and because the pleadings were patently deficient, lacking sufficient factual basis to support the claims.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 03 April 2014
Procedural Posture: Application for Leave to Commence Proceedings / Interlocutory (leave to File Proceedings)
Outcome: Leave to file the proposed proceeding is refused; applicants to pay respondents' costs.
Legal Topics: ['abuse of Process' 're Litigation' 'security for Costs' 'deficient Pleadings' 'leave to Commence Proceedings']

['practice and Procedure'] ['abuse of Process' 're Litigation' 'security for Costs' 'deficient Pleadings' 'leave to Commence Proceedings']

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

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Commence Proceedings / Interlocutory (leave to File Proceedings)

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether leave should be granted to applicants to commence new proceedings against the respondents concerning allegations made in previous proceedings' 'Whether the proposed proceedings constitute an abuse of process by re-litigating matters disposed of in earlier proceedings' 'Whether there are patent deficiencies in the applicants’ pleadings']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Leave to file the proposed proceeding is refused; applicants to pay respondents' costs.

Orders

['Leave to file the proposed proceeding is refused.' 'The applicants pay the costs of the respondents, to be taxed if not agreed.']