Gregory Jones Briscoe-Hough v Ron Hoenig [2024] NSWLEC 128

Gregory Jones Briscoe-Hough v Ron Hoenig [2024] NSWLEC 128

The proceedings were dismissed because the summons relied on by the Applicant disclosed no cause of action or articulable relief, and the Applicant failed to comply with previous court orders requiring proper identification of relief sought.

Parties
Applicant: Gregory James Briscoe-Hough; First Respondent: Ron Hoenig; Second Respondent: Brett Whitworth
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Notice of Motion to Dismiss; Ex Tempore Judgment
Outcome
Proceedings dismissed with costs to Respondents.
Legal Topics
Dismissal for No Cause of Action, Non Compliance With Court Orders
Civil Procedure Dismissal for No Cause of Action Non Compliance With Court Orders

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gregory James Briscoe-Hough

Applicant

Ron Hoenig

First Respondent

Brett Whitworth

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Notice of Motion to Dismiss; Ex Tempore Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the summons disclosed any reasonable cause of action
  2. 2 Whether proceedings should be dismissed for failure to comply with court orders and for lack of identified relief

Ratio Decidendi

The proceedings were dismissed because the summons relied on by the Applicant disclosed no cause of action or articulable relief, and the Applicant failed to comply with previous court orders requiring proper identification of relief sought.

Court Disposition

Proceedings dismissed with costs to Respondents.

Orders

  • The proceedings are dismissed pursuant to r 13.4(1)(b) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW).
  • The Applicant pay the Respondents' costs as agreed or assessed.