Swain v Balanced Securities Limited [2014] NSWSC 1550

Swain v Balanced Securities Limited [2014] NSWSC 1550

There was no ambiguity or clerical error in the consent orders made; Mr Swain was represented and consented to the orders, and the slip rule and inherent jurisdiction did not provide grounds for setting aside or amending the costs order. The application was dismissed.

Parties
Plaintiff: Peter Rolf Swain; Defendant: Balanced Securities Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 November 2014
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Consent Orders / Judgment on Summons
Outcome
Summons dismissed.
Legal Topics
Application to Set Aside Consent Orders, Slip Rule, Inherent Jurisdiction, Costs Order Interpretation
Equity Application to Set Aside Consent Orders Slip Rule Inherent Jurisdiction Costs Order Interpretation

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Rolf Swain

Plaintiff

Balanced Securities Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application to Set Aside Consent Orders / Judgment on Summons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 whether consent orders should be set aside under rule 36.17 or the inherent jurisdiction
  2. 2 whether there was ambiguity or clerical mistake in the orders
  3. 3 whether costs order against Mr Swain should be limited

Ratio Decidendi

There was no ambiguity or clerical error in the consent orders made; Mr Swain was represented and consented to the orders, and the slip rule and inherent jurisdiction did not provide grounds for setting aside or amending the costs order. The application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed.

Orders

  • Mr Swain's summons dismissed.
  • Mr Swain to pay Balanced Securities' costs in defending the summons.