Qasim v Bird & Ors (No 2) [2022] NSWSC 411

Qasim v Bird & Ors (No 2) [2022] NSWSC 411

No extension of time for service should be granted where no adequate explanation is provided, and no reasonable cause of action is disclosed against defendants; advocate's immunity bars claims against legal counsel and procedural rules require particularised claims of fraud.

Parties
Plaintiff: Shaheen Qasim; Eighth Defendant: Michael Hall; Ninth Defendant: Kate Richardson; Tenth Defendant: Sharon Armstrong aka Sutherland; Fourteenth Defendant: Craig Bolger
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Prerogative Writ Work, Related / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Extension of Time for Service and Dismissal of Proceedings Against Specific Defendants
Outcome
Plaintiff's notice of motion dismissed; summons declared no longer valid for service; proceedings against eighth, ninth, tenth, and fourteenth defendants dismissed.
Legal Topics
Service of Originating Process, Extension of Time for Service, Advocate's Immunity, Dismissal of Proceedings, Disclosure of Reasonable Cause of Action
Civil Procedure Service of Originating Process Extension of Time for Service Advocate's Immunity Dismissal of Proceedings Disclosure of Reasonable Cause of Action

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shaheen Qasim

Plaintiff

Michael Hall

Eighth Defendant

Kate Richardson

Ninth Defendant

Sharon Armstrong aka Sutherland

Tenth Defendant

Craig Bolger

Fourteenth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Prerogative Writ Work, Related / Ruling on Notice of Motion for Extension of Time for Service and Dismissal of Proceedings Against Specific Defendants

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether time should be extended for service of the summons under r 1.12 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether reasonable cause of action is disclosed against eighth, ninth, tenth and fourteenth defendants
  3. 3 Whether advocate's immunity applies to claims against certain defendants

Ratio Decidendi

No extension of time for service should be granted where no adequate explanation is provided, and no reasonable cause of action is disclosed against defendants; advocate's immunity bars claims against legal counsel and procedural rules require particularised claims of fraud.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's notice of motion dismissed; summons declared no longer valid for service; proceedings against eighth, ninth, tenth, and fourteenth defendants dismissed.

Orders

  • Dismiss the plaintiff's notice of motion dated 15 March 2022.
  • Declare that the summons filed 8 September 2021 is no longer valid for service.