Richard Green v Jennifer Schneller [1999] NSWSC 5

Richard Green v Jennifer Schneller [1999] NSWSC 5

Leave was refused because the defendant had already been given more than ample opportunities to bring the proposed cross-claim against Amalgamated Television, had failed to take advantage of earlier leave, and the application was made too late in the proceedings, shortly before the fixed trial date, in circumstances where joining Amalgamated Television would likely cause unfairness and procedural disruption.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 January 1999
Procedural Posture
Defamation Proceedings; Interlocutory Notice of Motion for Leave to File a Cross Claim / Interlocutory Application Before Trial
Outcome
Defendant's notice of motion to join Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited as cross-defendant dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['leave to File Cross Claim' 'joinder of Cross Defendant' 'late Interlocutory Application' 'issue Estoppel' 'anshun Estoppel' 'law Reform (miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1946 Contribution Claim']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure' 'contribution and Indemnity'] ['leave to File Cross Claim' 'joinder of Cross Defendant' 'late Interlocutory Application' 'issue Estoppel' 'anshun Estoppel' 'law Reform (miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1946 Contribution Claim']

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

Defamation Proceedings; Interlocutory Notice of Motion for Leave to File a Cross Claim / Interlocutory Application Before Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendant should be granted leave to file a cross-claim naming Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited as cross-defendant shortly before the listed defamation trial.' "Whether the defendant's delay and failure to use earlier leave to join Amalgamated Television justified refusing leave." 'Whether Port of Melbourne Authority v Anshun Pty Limited would prevent the defendant from later bringing separate proceedings for indemnity or contribution against Amalgamated Television.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the defendant had already been given more than ample opportunities to bring the proposed cross-claim against Amalgamated Television, had failed to take advantage of earlier leave, and the application was made too late in the proceedings, shortly before the fixed trial date, in circumstances where joining Amalgamated Television would likely cause unfairness and procedural disruption.

Court Disposition

Defendant's notice of motion to join Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited as cross-defendant dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The notice of motion is dismissed.' 'The defendant is to pay the costs of Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited.']