Khalifeh & Anor v RSPCA & Ors [2000] NSWSC 247

Khalifeh & Anor v RSPCA & Ors [2000] NSWSC 247

The proceedings should not be dismissed for want of prosecution, as the delay was not inordinate or contumelious and much was attributable to defendants. The test for summary dismissal is not met. The plaintiffs were granted an extension of time to file their further amended statement of claim.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Christian Khalifeh; Second Plaintiff: Norelle Khalifeh; First Defendant: Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals; Second Defendant: Jennifer Richardson; Third Defendant: Andrew Yeo; Fourth Defendant: Charles Meader; Fifth Defendant: David Butcher; Sixth Defendant: Steve Coleman; Seventh Defendant: Stewart Deaves; Eighth Defendant: Jeff Fairbrother; Ninth Defendant: Malcom Gett; Tenth Defendant: John Foran; Eleventh Defendant: Graham Hall; Twelfth Defendant: Shirley Holmes; Thirteenth Defendant: Deborah Vitlin; Fourteenth Defendant: Douglas Webb; Fifteenth Defendant: Debbie Williams; Sixteenth Defendant: Peter Nicholl
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 March 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution; Extension of Time for Amended Statement of Claim
Outcome
Defendants' notice of motion dismissed; plaintiffs granted extension of time for amended statement of claim; costs awarded to plaintiffs.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Want of Prosecution, Amended Statement of Claim, Extension of Time
Civil Procedure Summary Judgment Want of Prosecution Amended Statement of Claim Extension of Time

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

Parties

Christian Khalifeh

First Plaintiff

Norelle Khalifeh

Second Plaintiff

Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

First Defendant

Jennifer Richardson

Second Defendant

Andrew Yeo

Third Defendant

Charles Meader

Fourth Defendant

David Butcher

Fifth Defendant

Steve Coleman

Sixth Defendant

Stewart Deaves

Seventh Defendant

Jeff Fairbrother

Eighth Defendant

Malcom Gett

Ninth Defendant

John Foran

Tenth Defendant

Graham Hall

Eleventh Defendant

Shirley Holmes

Twelfth Defendant

Deborah Vitlin

Thirteenth Defendant

Douglas Webb

Fourteenth Defendant

Debbie Williams

Fifteenth Defendant

Peter Nicholl

Sixteenth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution; Extension of Time for Amended Statement of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proceedings should be dismissed for want of prosecution
  2. 2 Whether summary judgment should be granted under Supreme Court Rules Part 13 r 5
  3. 3 Whether time for filing amended statement of claim should be extended

Ratio Decidendi

The proceedings should not be dismissed for want of prosecution, as the delay was not inordinate or contumelious and much was attributable to defendants. The test for summary dismissal is not met. The plaintiffs were granted an extension of time to file their further amended statement of claim.

Court Disposition

Defendants' notice of motion dismissed; plaintiffs granted extension of time for amended statement of claim; costs awarded to plaintiffs.

Orders

  • Defendants' notice of motion filed 6 September 1999 is dismissed.
  • Defendants are to pay the plaintiffs' costs.