Aliza Alice Sassoon v Adrian Rose and ors [2011] NSWSC 378

Aliza Alice Sassoon v Adrian Rose and ors [2011] NSWSC 378

Proceedings 2011/94941 were dismissed because they disclosed no conceivable claim against the Department of Housing and any claim against Gemini Hotel had become futile. Proceedings 2011/82496 were not dismissed because, although the summons was embarrassing and difficult to interpret, it disclosed a potentially arguable family provision claim requiring amendment and advice. Special reasons justified a further pro bono referral because the possible family provision claim was distinct from the earlier referral and might bring focus to the proceedings.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 April 2011
Procedural Posture
Equity Division Duty List; Applications for Summary Dismissal, Leave to Amend Summons, and Pro Bono Referral / Ex Tempore Judgment on Interlocutory Applications
Outcome
Application against Department of Housing dismissed. Plaintiff's proposed amended summons dismissed. Defendant Adrian Rose's dismissal motion dismissed. Plaintiff referred for pro bono assistance and summons amended to identify a family provision claim.
Legal Topics
['summary Dismissal' 'abuse of Process' 'embarrassing Summons' 'pro Bono Referral' 'extension of Time' 'family Provision Claim by Former Spouse']
['civil Procedure' 'equity' 'succession' 'family Provision'] ['summary Dismissal' 'abuse of Process' 'embarrassing Summons' 'pro Bono Referral' 'extension of Time' 'family Provision Claim by Former Spouse']

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

Equity Division Duty List; Applications for Summary Dismissal, Leave to Amend Summons, and Pro Bono Referral / Ex Tempore Judgment on Interlocutory Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether proceedings 2011/94941 against the Department of Housing and Gemini Hotel disclosed a reasonable cause of action or should be dismissed as an abuse of process.' 'Whether proceedings 2011/82496 should be struck out or dismissed as vexatious, embarrassing or an abuse of process.' 'Whether the plaintiff should be granted leave to file her proposed amended summons joining additional defendants.' 'Whether the plaintiff should be referred for pro bono assistance despite a prior referral within three years.' 'Whether the material disclosed a potentially arguable family provision claim and need for an extension of time.']

Ratio Decidendi

Proceedings 2011/94941 were dismissed because they disclosed no conceivable claim against the Department of Housing and any claim against Gemini Hotel had become futile. Proceedings 2011/82496 were not dismissed because, although the summons was embarrassing and difficult to interpret, it disclosed a potentially arguable family provision claim requiring amendment and advice. Special reasons justified a further pro bono referral because the possible family provision claim was distinct from the earlier referral and might bring focus to the proceedings.

Court Disposition

Application against Department of Housing dismissed. Plaintiff's proposed amended summons dismissed. Defendant Adrian Rose's dismissal motion dismissed. Plaintiff referred for pro bono assistance and summons amended to identify a family provision claim.

Orders

  • ['In proceedings 2011/94941, the proceedings be dismissed.' "Ms Sassoon pay the Department of Housing's costs of proceedings 2011/94941." "In proceedings 2011/82496, the plaintiff's notice of motion of 23 March 2011 seeking leave to file the amended summons attached to it be dismissed." "In proceedings 2011/82496,...