Wang v State of New South Wales [2019] NSWSC 1332

Wang v State of New South Wales [2019] NSWSC 1332

Because the plaintiff had filed three notices of motion seeking summary judgment, including a further motion after existing motions had been fixed for hearing on 30 October 2019 and after Campbell J had stood over a similar motion, the multiplication of applications seeking the same relief was an abuse of the Court's processes and contrary to proper case management. It was therefore appropriate to stand over the 23 September 2019 motion, restrict further applications by the plaintiff without leave until 31 October 2019, direct the Registry not to accept further notices of motion without leave, and order costs to follow the event.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Practice and Procedure Notice of Motion in Common Law Proceedings / First Defendant's Notice of Motion Heard Ex Tempore on 1 October 2019, After the Plaintiff Filed Multiple Notices of Motion for Summary Judgment and Existing Motions Had Been Fixed for Hearing on 30 October 2019
Outcome
First defendant's motion granted; plaintiff's 23 September 2019 motion stood over; further applications by the plaintiff restricted without leave until 31 October 2019; costs awarded to the first and second defendants.
Legal Topics
['unrepresented Litigant' 'multiple Notices of Motion' 'summary Judgment Motions' 'case Management' 'restriction on Further Applications Without Leave' 'costs Follow the Event']
['practice and Procedure' 'civil Procedure'] ['unrepresented Litigant' 'multiple Notices of Motion' 'summary Judgment Motions' 'case Management' 'restriction on Further Applications Without Leave' 'costs Follow the Event']

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

Practice and Procedure Notice of Motion in Common Law Proceedings / First Defendant's Notice of Motion Heard Ex Tempore on 1 October 2019, After the Plaintiff Filed Multiple Notices of Motion for Summary Judgment and Existing Motions Had Been Fixed for Hearing on 30 October 2019

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the plaintiff's motion filed on 23 September 2019 should be stood over to be heard with motions already fixed for 30 October 2019." 'Whether, until 31 October 2019, the plaintiff should be prohibited from making further applications in the proceedings without leave.' 'Whether the Registry should be directed not to accept further notices of motion from the plaintiff without leave.' "Whether the plaintiff should pay the first and second defendants' costs of the motion."]

Ratio Decidendi

Because the plaintiff had filed three notices of motion seeking summary judgment, including a further motion after existing motions had been fixed for hearing on 30 October 2019 and after Campbell J had stood over a similar motion, the multiplication of applications seeking the same relief was an abuse of the Court's processes and contrary to proper case management. It was therefore appropriate to stand over the 23 September 2019 motion, restrict further applications by the plaintiff without leave until 31 October 2019, direct the Registry not to accept further notices of motion without leave, and order costs to follow the event.

Court Disposition

First defendant's motion granted; plaintiff's 23 September 2019 motion stood over; further applications by the plaintiff restricted without leave until 31 October 2019; costs awarded to the first and second defendants.

Orders

  • ["The plaintiff's motion filed on 23 September 2019 is stood over to be heard with the motions already fixed for hearing on 30 October 2019." 'Until 31 October 2019, any further application by the plaintiff in proceedings 2019/227867 may be made only with leave granted by the Registrar, Common Law duty judge or...