Mahmoud v Sutherland [2012] NSWCA 280

Mahmoud v Sutherland [2012] NSWCA 280

The applicant's notice of motion was dismissed because the respondent's notice of motion filed 8 August 2012 was only before the Registrar for directions on 8 October 2012 and would not be before the Court at the appeal hearing on 12 September 2012; the applicant did not need to address it before the appeal; there was insufficient material to determine that no reasonable case had been made out or that the notice was an abuse of process; and the notice had no tendency to cause prejudice, embarrassment or delay in the appeal proceedings.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 September 2012
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Applicant's Notice of Motion Filed 24 August 2012 Seeking to Vacate Directions and Appeal Hearing Dates and to Expedite or Strike Out the Respondent's Notice of Motion Filed 8 August 2012.
Outcome
Notice of motion filed 24 August 2012 dismissed.
Legal Topics
['strike Out of Notice of Motion' 'appeal Directions' 'vexatious Proceedings Application' 'abuse of Process' 'prejudice, Embarrassment or Delay']
['practice and Procedure' 'civil Procedure'] ['strike Out of Notice of Motion' 'appeal Directions' 'vexatious Proceedings Application' 'abuse of Process' 'prejudice, Embarrassment or Delay']

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 Application / Applicant's Notice of Motion Filed 24 August 2012 Seeking to Vacate Directions and Appeal Hearing Dates and to Expedite or Strike Out the Respondent's Notice of Motion Filed 8 August 2012.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the hearing date for the notices of motion on 8 October 2012 should be vacated.' "Whether the respondent's notice of motion filed 8 August 2012 should be heard and disposed of as quickly as possible." "Whether the respondent's notice of motion filed 8 August 2012 should be struck out under Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, Pt 14, r 14.28." 'Whether the hearing of the appeal on 12 September 2012 should be vacated.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's notice of motion was dismissed because the respondent's notice of motion filed 8 August 2012 was only before the Registrar for directions on 8 October 2012 and would not be before the Court at the appeal hearing on 12 September 2012; the applicant did not need to address it before the appeal; there was insufficient material to determine that no reasonable case had been made out or that the notice was an abuse of process; and the notice had no tendency to cause prejudice, embarrassment or delay in the appeal proceedings.

Court Disposition

Notice of motion filed 24 August 2012 dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Notice of motion filed 24 August 2012 dismissed.' 'Confirm that the hearing of the appeal is to proceed on 12 September 2012.']