Shapkin v Lorenzato (No 2) [2024] NSWSC 1630

Shapkin v Lorenzato (No 2) [2024] NSWSC 1630

The plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the material he sought to rely upon was not reasonably available earlier or that exceptional circumstances required reopening; the history shows ample opportunity to tender evidence and the interests of justice favour finality; therefore, leave to reopen proceedings was refused.

Parties
Plaintiff: Mr Vasily Shapkin; Defendant: Ms Angele Lorenzato; Second Defendant: NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal; Amicus: Attorney General (NSW)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 December 2024
Procedural Posture
Application to Reopen Proceedings / Post Hearing Motion for Leave to Reopen – Second Application
Outcome
Plaintiff's application to reopen dismissed
Legal Topics
Re Opening Proceedings, Interest of Justice, Procedural Fairness
Civil Procedure Re Opening Proceedings Interest of Justice Procedural Fairness

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Vasily Shapkin

Plaintiff

Ms Angele Lorenzato

Defendant

NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal

Second Defendant

Attorney General (NSW)

Amicus

Procedural Posture

Application to Reopen Proceedings / Post Hearing Motion for Leave to Reopen – Second Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted to the plaintiff to re-open proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the interests of justice require the granting of the application
  3. 3 Whether evidence sought to be relied upon was available and could have been tendered earlier

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the material he sought to rely upon was not reasonably available earlier or that exceptional circumstances required reopening; the history shows ample opportunity to tender evidence and the interests of justice favour finality; therefore, leave to reopen proceedings was refused.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's application to reopen dismissed

Orders

  • The plaintiff's notice of motion filed on 16 December 2024 seeking for a second time leave to reopen his case is dismissed.