Lloyd-Jones v Allen (No 2) [2012] NSWCA 315

Lloyd-Jones v Allen (No 2) [2012] NSWCA 315

The inclusion of the prefatory words in order 5(ii) did not reflect the Court’s intention, as damages were due irrespective of the outcome on imputations (a) and (c). The orders should be amended under UCPR 36.17 to correct this accidental slip or omission.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 September 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application to Amend Orders Following Judgment
Outcome
Orders amended under slip rule to reflect Court's intention.
Legal Topics
['judgments and Orders' 'application to Amend Orders' 'correction Under Slip Rule']
['procedure'] ['judgments and Orders' 'application to Amend Orders' 'correction Under Slip Rule']

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

Appeal / Application to Amend Orders Following Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether orders made on 1 August 2012 should be amended under UCPR r 36.16 or r 36.17 to reflect the Court’s intentions']

Ratio Decidendi

The inclusion of the prefatory words in order 5(ii) did not reflect the Court’s intention, as damages were due irrespective of the outcome on imputations (a) and (c). The orders should be amended under UCPR 36.17 to correct this accidental slip or omission.

Court Disposition

Orders amended under slip rule to reflect Court's intention.

Orders

  • ["Amend order 5(i) of the Court's orders entered on 1 August 2012 by adding the word 'amended' prior to the words 'statement of claim'." "Amend order 5(ii) of the Court's orders entered on 1 August 2012 by deleting the words 'in the event the defendant fails to establish the defence of truth to the imputations...