Carey v Singh [2010] FCA 1518

Carey v Singh [2010] FCA 1518

Having regard to the fact that the retainer agreement is governed by NSW law, the impugned conduct and required witnesses are connected to NSW, the balance of convenience tilts to NSW, and the NSW Supreme Court has the supervisory jurisdiction over NSW legal practitioners, the interests of justice require transfer to that Court under the Cross-vesting Act.

Parties
Applicant: Norman Phillip Carey; First Respondent: Avendra Singh; Second Respondent: Geoffrey Paul Standen; Second Respondent: Paul Anthony Bannon; Second Respondent: Bradley Paul Kermond; Second Respondent: Simon Hugh Fraser; Second Respondent: Anthony Christopher Rumore; Second Respondent: Gregory Allen Skehan; Second Respondent: Peter John Moran; Second Respondent: Dunstan De Souza; Second Respondent: Alexander Ostermayer; Second Respondent: John Laurence Bowman; Second Respondent: Antony Paul Riordan; Second Respondent: Edward Dominic Crennan; Second Respondent: David Sutherland Kennedy; Second Respondent: Gary David Newton; Second Respondent: Peter John Harkin; Second Respondent: Gavin William Creighton; Second Respondent: Anthony Frederick Perkins; Second Respondent: Stuart William Hetherington; Second Respondent: Sam Anthony Ingui; Second Respondent: Brendan Paul Maier; Second Respondent: Kristen Lopes; Second Respondent: David Edward Miller; Second Respondent: Linda Murphy; Third Respondent: Martin John Deutsch; Third Respondent: Mark Andrew Radford; Fourth Respondent: Keith Brendan Bethlehem
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Application (motion to Transfer Proceeding) / Interlocutory – Determination of Application for Transfer Under Cross Vesting Legislation
Outcome
Application to transfer granted
Legal Topics
Transfer of Proceedings, Cross Vesting, Retainer Agreements, Misleading or Deceptive Conduct, Breach of Contract
Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Contract Trade Practices Transfer of Proceedings Cross Vesting Retainer Agreements Misleading or Deceptive Conduct +1 more

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

Parties

Norman Phillip Carey

Applicant

Avendra Singh

First Respondent

Geoffrey Paul Standen

Second Respondent

Paul Anthony Bannon

Second Respondent

Bradley Paul Kermond

Second Respondent

Simon Hugh Fraser

Second Respondent

Anthony Christopher Rumore

Second Respondent

Gregory Allen Skehan

Second Respondent

Peter John Moran

Second Respondent

Dunstan De Souza

Second Respondent

Alexander Ostermayer

Second Respondent

John Laurence Bowman

Second Respondent

Antony Paul Riordan

Second Respondent

Edward Dominic Crennan

Second Respondent

David Sutherland Kennedy

Second Respondent

Gary David Newton

Second Respondent

Peter John Harkin

Second Respondent

Gavin William Creighton

Second Respondent

Anthony Frederick Perkins

Second Respondent

Stuart William Hetherington

Second Respondent

Sam Anthony Ingui

Second Respondent

Brendan Paul Maier

Second Respondent

Kristen Lopes

Second Respondent

David Edward Miller

Second Respondent

Linda Murphy

Second Respondent

Martin John Deutsch

Third Respondent

Mark Andrew Radford

Third Respondent

Keith Brendan Bethlehem

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application (motion to Transfer Proceeding) / Interlocutory – Determination of Application for Transfer Under Cross Vesting Legislation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proceeding should be transferred from the Federal Court of Australia to the Supreme Court of New South Wales under the Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-vesting) Act 1987 (Cth)
  2. 2 Which forum is more appropriate having regard to the interests of justice and substantive connections with the dispute

Ratio Decidendi

Having regard to the fact that the retainer agreement is governed by NSW law, the impugned conduct and required witnesses are connected to NSW, the balance of convenience tilts to NSW, and the NSW Supreme Court has the supervisory jurisdiction over NSW legal practitioners, the interests of justice require transfer to that Court under the Cross-vesting Act.

Court Disposition

Application to transfer granted

Orders

  • This proceeding is transferred from the Federal Court of Australia to the Supreme Court of New South Wales.
  • Costs are in the cause.