O'Keefe v Integral Corporate Property Pty Ltd [2022] NSWSC 839

O'Keefe v Integral Corporate Property Pty Ltd [2022] NSWSC 839

It is just in the circumstances, given the unwellness of the defendants' counsel leading to unavoidable delay, that the hearing dates be vacated and the defendants pay the plaintiffs' costs thrown away, noting that major preparation work and cancellation fees are not wasted or being charged.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Graham Colin O'Keefe; Second Plaintiff: Graham Colin O'Keefe as assignee of the Trustee in Bankruptcy, Graham Colin; First Defendant: Integral Corporate Property Pty Ltd; Second Defendant: James George Petersen (also known as George Kekatos); Third Defendant: K & T Services Pty Ltd; Fourth Defendant: Cheryl Joanne Thrush; Fifth Defendant: Perpetual Business Services Pty Ltd; Plaintiff: Graham O'Keefe; Second Defendant: K&T Services Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil (equity) / Procedural Application (vacation of Hearing/adjournment)
Outcome
Hearing dates vacated, defendants to pay plaintiffs' costs thrown away.
Legal Topics
Adjournment, Vacation of Hearing Dates, Costs Thrown Away, Illness of Counsel
Civil Procedure Adjournment Vacation of Hearing Dates Costs Thrown Away Illness of Counsel

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 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Graham Colin O'Keefe

First Plaintiff

Graham Colin O'Keefe as assignee of the Trustee in Bankruptcy, Graham Colin

Second Plaintiff

Integral Corporate Property Pty Ltd

First Defendant

James George Petersen (also known as George Kekatos)

Second Defendant

K & T Services Pty Ltd

Third Defendant

Cheryl Joanne Thrush

Fourth Defendant

Perpetual Business Services Pty Ltd

Fifth Defendant

Graham O'Keefe

Plaintiff

K&T Services Pty Ltd

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (equity) / Procedural Application (vacation of Hearing/adjournment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the hearing dates should be vacated due to illness of counsel
  2. 2 Whether the defendants should pay plaintiffs' costs thrown away due to vacated hearing dates

Ratio Decidendi

It is just in the circumstances, given the unwellness of the defendants' counsel leading to unavoidable delay, that the hearing dates be vacated and the defendants pay the plaintiffs' costs thrown away, noting that major preparation work and cancellation fees are not wasted or being charged.

Court Disposition

Hearing dates vacated, defendants to pay plaintiffs' costs thrown away.

Orders

  • The hearing dates scheduled to commence 27 June 2022 are vacated.
  • Proceedings to be listed before the Expedition Judge on 1 July 2022 for a new hearing date.