Charan v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2020] NSWCA 13

Charan v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2020] NSWCA 13

Leave to appeal was refused because the Court of Appeal lacked jurisdiction by reason of s 7(5) of the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-vesting) Act 1987 (Cth), as the matter arose under the Bankruptcy Act. Even if jurisdiction existed, leave would be refused as the claims had been previously litigated and no injustice was shown.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision on Application for Leave to Appeal From Summary Dismissal
Outcome
Summons seeking leave to appeal dismissed; costs ordered against second applicant, not on indemnity basis.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'summary Dismissal' 'standing in Bankruptcy' 'res Judicata' 'abuse of Process' 'jurisdiction']
['bankruptcy' 'civil Procedure'] ['leave to Appeal' 'summary Dismissal' 'standing in Bankruptcy' 'res Judicata' 'abuse of Process' 'jurisdiction']

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

Application for Leave to Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision on Application for Leave to Appeal From Summary Dismissal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicants have standing to bring claims following bankruptcy' 'Whether the claims are barred by prior proceedings (res judicata/abuse of process)' 'Whether the claims fall within section 116(2)(g) of the Bankruptcy Act' 'Whether the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to hear the appeal under s 7(5) of Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-vesting) Act']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the Court of Appeal lacked jurisdiction by reason of s 7(5) of the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-vesting) Act 1987 (Cth), as the matter arose under the Bankruptcy Act. Even if jurisdiction existed, leave would be refused as the claims had been previously litigated and no injustice was shown.

Court Disposition

Summons seeking leave to appeal dismissed; costs ordered against second applicant, not on indemnity basis.

Orders

  • ['Summons seeking leave to appeal dismissed.' "Second applicant to pay the respondents' costs."]