Williams v Australian Mutual Provident Society [1905] HCA 6

Williams v Australian Mutual Provident Society [1905] HCA 6

The High Court may order that pending appeal proceedings be continued in the name of a new party, substituting for the previous appellant, and amend the proceedings accordingly, even where the Appeal Rules contain no express provision for such substitution.

Parties
Appellant: Williams; Respondent: Australian Mutual Provident Society; Applicant (substituted Appellant): Widow of testator / Executrix
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 March 1905
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Motion to Substitute Party on Appeal
Outcome
application granted
Legal Topics
Appeal Rules, Substitution of Parties
Civil Procedure Appeal Rules Substitution of Parties

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Williams

Appellant

Australian Mutual Provident Society

Respondent

Widow of testator / Executrix

Applicant (substituted Appellant)

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Motion to Substitute Party on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appeal may be continued in the name of a new party where the rules make no express provision

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court may order that pending appeal proceedings be continued in the name of a new party, substituting for the previous appellant, and amend the proceedings accordingly, even where the Appeal Rules contain no express provision for such substitution.

Court Disposition

application granted

Orders

  • Proceedings on appeal to be carried on between the applicant (executrix), as appellant, and the respondent; proceedings to be amended accordingly.