Martin v Malouf [2021] NSWSC 415

Martin v Malouf [2021] NSWSC 415

Ms Martin's claim discloses no reasonable cause of action against Mr Vardanega, Mr Roberts, and Mr Studdart. The pleadings lack necessary particulars, rest on conclusions and opinions, and advance serious allegations for which there is no factual foundation against these solicitors. The claims are untenable, constitute an abuse of process, and may be time barred. Dismissal is warranted under the rules and relevant statutory obligations.

Parties
Plaintiff: Lynette Martin; Third Defendant: Stephen Vardanega; Fourth Defendant: Michael Roberts; Sixth Defendant: Nicholas Studdart
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 April 2021
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion (strike Out/dismissal) / Interlocutory (dismissal Application)
Outcome
Proceedings against the third, fourth, and sixth defendants dismissed.
Legal Topics
Striking Out Proceedings, Reasonable Cause of Action, Abuse of Process, Limitation Periods
Civil Procedure Limitation of Actions Striking Out Proceedings Reasonable Cause of Action Abuse of Process Limitation Periods

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lynette Martin

Plaintiff

Stephen Vardanega

Third Defendant

Michael Roberts

Fourth Defendant

Nicholas Studdart

Sixth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion (strike Out/dismissal) / Interlocutory (dismissal Application)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the statement of claim discloses a reasonable cause of action against the third, fourth, and sixth defendants
  2. 2 Whether the proceedings are frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether the proceedings are time barred under the Limitation Act 1969 (NSW)

Ratio Decidendi

Ms Martin's claim discloses no reasonable cause of action against Mr Vardanega, Mr Roberts, and Mr Studdart. The pleadings lack necessary particulars, rest on conclusions and opinions, and advance serious allegations for which there is no factual foundation against these solicitors. The claims are untenable, constitute an abuse of process, and may be time barred. Dismissal is warranted under the rules and relevant statutory obligations.

Court Disposition

Proceedings against the third, fourth, and sixth defendants dismissed.

Orders

  • The proceedings against Mr Vardanega, Mr Roberts and Mr Studdart be dismissed.
  • Unless the parties approach to be heard within 7 days, Ms Martin is to bear Mr Vardanega, Mr Roberts and Mr Studdart's costs as agreed or assessed.