Bayne v Blake (No 3.) [1909] HCA 60

Bayne v Blake (No 3.) [1909] HCA 60

Summary judgment for the defendants had been properly given because the action was frivolous or vexatious in view of matters previously litigated between the parties, and any attempt to re-open the matters would be hopeless.

Parties
Appellant: Mary Bayne; Appellant: Lila Elizabeth Bayne; Respondent: Arthur Palmer Blake; Respondent: William Riggall; Respondent: Robert Murray Smith; Respondent: Grace Bayne
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 September 1909
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From Summary Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Frivolous or Vexatious Action, Breach of Trust, Previous Litigation
Civil Procedure Summary Judgment Frivolous or Vexatious Action Breach of Trust Previous Litigation

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 2 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mary Bayne

Appellant

Lila Elizabeth Bayne

Appellant

Arthur Palmer Blake

Respondent

William Riggall

Respondent

Robert Murray Smith

Respondent

Grace Bayne

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal From Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether summary judgment was properly granted on the basis that the action was frivolous or vexatious and had been previously litigated
  2. 2 Whether an attempt to re-litigate matters already decided is hopeless
  3. 3 Application of res judicata or equivalent principles to the facts

Ratio Decidendi

Summary judgment for the defendants had been properly given because the action was frivolous or vexatious in view of matters previously litigated between the parties, and any attempt to re-open the matters would be hopeless.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs