Arjunan v Neighbourhood Association DP No 285853 (No 3) [2023] NSWCA 266

Arjunan v Neighbourhood Association DP No 285853 (No 3) [2023] NSWCA 266

The notice of motion was dismissed because it sought in substance to reverse the Court's refusal of leave to appeal and to reagitate arguments already considered and rejected in Arjunan (No 1) and Arjunan (No 2). The applicants identified no proper basis under UCPR r 36.16(3A) to set aside or vary the orders. Their persistent refusal to accept orders already made was vexatious, oppressive and unfair to the respondent and amounted to an abuse of process, justifying a Teoh direction.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion to Set Aside and Vary Orders Under UCPR R 36.16 / Court of Appeal Determination on the Papers
Outcome
The notice of motion filed on 17 August 2023 was dismissed with costs and a Teoh direction was made.
Legal Topics
['application to Reopen and Vary Orders' 'ucpr R 36.16' 'reagitation of Arguments' 'teoh Direction' 'vexatious Proceedings' 'abuse of Process']
['civil Procedure' 'judgments and Orders' 'costs' 'community Title'] ['application to Reopen and Vary Orders' 'ucpr R 36.16' 'reagitation of Arguments' 'teoh Direction' 'vexatious Proceedings' 'abuse of Process']

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

Notice of Motion to Set Aside and Vary Orders Under UCPR R 36.16 / Court of Appeal Determination on the Papers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the orders made in Arjunan v Neighbourhood Association DP No 285853 (No 2) [2023] NSWCA 176 should be set aside or varied under r 36.16(3A) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW).' 'Whether the applicants had identified any basis for reopening orders where their arguments had already been considered in earlier Supreme Court and Court of Appeal proceedings.' 'Whether a Teoh direction should be made to prevent further applications seeking in substance the same relief.']

Ratio Decidendi

The notice of motion was dismissed because it sought in substance to reverse the Court's refusal of leave to appeal and to reagitate arguments already considered and rejected in Arjunan (No 1) and Arjunan (No 2). The applicants identified no proper basis under UCPR r 36.16(3A) to set aside or vary the orders. Their persistent refusal to accept orders already made was vexatious, oppressive and unfair to the respondent and amounted to an abuse of process, justifying a Teoh direction.

Court Disposition

The notice of motion filed on 17 August 2023 was dismissed with costs and a Teoh direction was made.

Orders

  • ['The notice of motion filed on 17 August 2023 is dismissed with costs.' 'If Mr Kannapiran Chinna Arjunan or Ms Thangam Kannapiran files any further application against Neighbourhood Association DP No 285853 in respect of the matters litigated in the Supreme Court of New South Wales or the Court of Appeal seeking,...