Solarus Projects v Vero Insurance [No 3] [2013] NSWSC 603

Solarus Projects v Vero Insurance [No 3] [2013] NSWSC 603

Because an indefinite stay of the whole proceedings pending the Fidelity Fund claim had little prospect, would be contrary to the administration of justice and the interests of the other parties, and there had been relevant delay by the second plaintiff or related interests, the proper exercise of discretion was to allow the second plaintiff only the opportunity to seek an extension of time to comply with Button J's security for costs order; prayer 2 was therefore stood over for hearing and prayers 3, 4 and 5 were stood over for mention or direction.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Applications / Second Plaintiff's Notice of Motion Filed in Court and Made Returnable Instanter; Remaining Prayers Stood Over for Hearing, Mention or Direction
Outcome
Prayer 1 of the second plaintiff's motion had already been granted; prayer 2 was stood over for hearing; prayers 3, 4 and 5 were stood over for mention or direction; directions were made for affidavit evidence and circulation of the second plaintiff's amended statement of claim; costs were reserved.
Legal Topics
['notice of Motion' 'separate Representation' 'leave to Amend Statement of Claim' 'security for Costs' 'extension of Time' 'stay of Proceedings' 'legal Practitioners Fidelity Fund']
['practice and Procedure' 'insurance'] ['notice of Motion' 'separate Representation' 'leave to Amend Statement of Claim' 'security for Costs' 'extension of Time' 'stay of Proceedings' 'legal Practitioners Fidelity Fund']

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

Interlocutory Applications / Second Plaintiff's Notice of Motion Filed in Court and Made Returnable Instanter; Remaining Prayers Stood Over for Hearing, Mention or Direction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the second plaintiff should have leave to file its notice of motion in court and make it returnable instanter' 'Whether prayer 2 seeking an extension of time to comply with orders for security for costs should be adjourned to enable the defendant to file evidence' 'Whether the whole proceedings should be stayed while the second plaintiff advances a claim against its former solicitors from the Fidelity Fund' 'Whether prayers 3, 4 and 5 should be stood over rather than determined immediately']

Ratio Decidendi

Because an indefinite stay of the whole proceedings pending the Fidelity Fund claim had little prospect, would be contrary to the administration of justice and the interests of the other parties, and there had been relevant delay by the second plaintiff or related interests, the proper exercise of discretion was to allow the second plaintiff only the opportunity to seek an extension of time to comply with Button J's security for costs order; prayer 2 was therefore stood over for hearing and prayers 3, 4 and 5 were stood over for mention or direction.

Court Disposition

Prayer 1 of the second plaintiff's motion had already been granted; prayer 2 was stood over for hearing; prayers 3, 4 and 5 were stood over for mention or direction; directions were made for affidavit evidence and circulation of the second plaintiff's amended statement of claim; costs were reserved.

Orders

  • ['Prayer 2 is stood over for hearing on a date in or about mid July to be fixed with my associate before 4pm today. I give the parties leave to contact my associate by telephone for that purpose.' 'Prayers 3, 4 and 5 are stood over for mention or direction on the date fixed pursuant to order 1.' 'The defendant to...