Forbes Engineering (Asia) Pte Limited v Mark Forbes [2007] FCA 1598

Forbes Engineering (Asia) Pte Limited v Mark Forbes [2007] FCA 1598

The trial dates should be vacated in the interests of justice, due to the recent change of solicitors for the respondents, the need for further amended defence and additional evidence, lack of demonstrated substantial prejudice to the applicants beyond typical prolongation, and significant prejudice to respondents if forced to proceed. Respondents must pay applicants' costs thrown away by the adjournment.

Parties
First Applicant: Forbes Engineering (Asia) Pte Limited; Second Applicant: Forbes Engineering Holdings (Australia) Pty Limited; First Respondent: Mark Forbes; Second Respondent: Karen Lee Forbes
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application for Adjournment/vacation of Trial Dates
Outcome
Application for vacation of trial dates granted. Trial dates vacated. Applicants entitled to costs thrown away by adjournment.
Legal Topics
Vacation of Trial Dates, Costs Thrown Away, Adjournment, Case Management
Civil Procedure Vacation of Trial Dates Costs Thrown Away Adjournment Case Management

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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Forbes Engineering (Asia) Pte Limited

First Applicant

Forbes Engineering Holdings (Australia) Pty Limited

Second Applicant

Mark Forbes

First Respondent

Karen Lee Forbes

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application for Adjournment/vacation of Trial Dates

Legal Issues

  1. 1 whether trial dates should be vacated
  2. 2 whether applicants are entitled to costs thrown away by adjournment

Ratio Decidendi

The trial dates should be vacated in the interests of justice, due to the recent change of solicitors for the respondents, the need for further amended defence and additional evidence, lack of demonstrated substantial prejudice to the applicants beyond typical prolongation, and significant prejudice to respondents if forced to proceed. Respondents must pay applicants' costs thrown away by the adjournment.

Court Disposition

Application for vacation of trial dates granted. Trial dates vacated. Applicants entitled to costs thrown away by adjournment.

Orders

  • The date for trial fixed by the Court be vacated in accordance with Order 30 rule 7 of the Federal Court Rules.
  • The Court dispense with the requirements of service of this Notice of Motion as set out in Order 19 rule 3 in accordance with Order 19 rule 2 of the Federal Court Rules.