KING-ORSBORN v ARTTWON DEVELOPMENT LTD [1995] NSWCA 242

KING-ORSBORN v ARTTWON DEVELOPMENT LTD [1995] NSWCA 242

The serious and repeated defaults by the appellants, combined with inadequate explanations and lack of bona fide engagement, justified striking out their defence and cross-claim. The District Court had implied power to require security, and there was no miscarriage of discretion.

Parties
Appellant: Mrs King-Orsborn; Appellant: Mr King-Orsborn; Respondent: Arttwon Development Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 May 1995
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Debt Recovery, Striking Out Pleadings, Non Compliance With Court Orders, Security for Verdict
Civil Procedure Debt Recovery Striking Out Pleadings Non Compliance With Court Orders Security for Verdict

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs King-Orsborn

Appellant

Mr King-Orsborn

Appellant

Arttwon Development Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the District Court judge erred in striking out the appellants' defence and cross-claim.
  2. 2 Whether the court had power to require security to be provided as a condition of avoiding strike-out for past defaults.

Ratio Decidendi

The serious and repeated defaults by the appellants, combined with inadequate explanations and lack of bona fide engagement, justified striking out their defence and cross-claim. The District Court had implied power to require security, and there was no miscarriage of discretion.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Appellants to pay respondent's costs.