Tarrant v Statewide Secured Investments Ltd [2011] NSWCA 248

Tarrant v Statewide Secured Investments Ltd [2011] NSWCA 248

The application for adjournment was refused as further delay was not justified by applicant's ongoing lack of a viable defence or inability to secure representation. Leave to appeal was refused because no draft amended defence or affidavit supporting a substantive ground for appeal was provided, and the orders of 17 June 2009 should be treated as properly entered, regularizing the procedural history in accordance with the court's inherent and rule-based powers.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 August 2011
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Decision on Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for adjournment refused; summons seeking leave to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['reopening of Judgment' 'entry of Judgments and Orders' 'adjournment' 'application for Leave to Appeal']
['civil Procedure'] ['reopening of Judgment' 'entry of Judgments and Orders' 'adjournment' 'application for Leave to Appeal']

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

Application for Leave to Appeal / Decision on Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether to grant adjournment of proceedings' 'Whether to grant leave to appeal against refusal to set aside judgment' 'Whether the judgment and orders were regularly entered' 'Whether applicant presented an arguable defence']

Ratio Decidendi

The application for adjournment was refused as further delay was not justified by applicant's ongoing lack of a viable defence or inability to secure representation. Leave to appeal was refused because no draft amended defence or affidavit supporting a substantive ground for appeal was provided, and the orders of 17 June 2009 should be treated as properly entered, regularizing the procedural history in accordance with the court's inherent and rule-based powers.

Court Disposition

Application for adjournment refused; summons seeking leave to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ["Refuse the application to adjourn today's proceedings." 'Direct that the judgment and orders of Adams J be taken to have been entered on 17 June 2009, this order having effect from that date.' 'Dismiss the summons seeking leave to appeal from the judgment of Garling J of 9 March 2011.' "Direct that the order made...