Norman v Wall (No. 3) [2020] NSWSC 998

Norman v Wall (No. 3) [2020] NSWSC 998

The earlier dismissal orders were set aside because the Court concluded on reflection that it should not have dismissed the proceedings of its own motion without first giving the unrepresented plaintiffs an opportunity to be heard about whether they wished to proceed on the confined professional negligence claim against Mr Wall, particularly where the material factual basis of that claim had appeared in iterations of the statements of claim.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Procedural and Other Rulings / Revised Ex Tempore Ruling After the Court Had Refused Leave to Rely on a Further Amended Statement of Claim and Dismissed the Proceedings Earlier the Same Morning
Outcome
The Court set aside the earlier dismissal of the proceedings and the earlier costs orders, and deferred consideration of the further amended statement of claim under UCPR 14.28 until after hearing from the parties.
Legal Topics
['amendment of Pleadings' 'dismissal of Proceedings' 'costs Orders' 'self Represented Litigants' 'strike Out of Pleadings']
['civil Procedure'] ['amendment of Pleadings' 'dismissal of Proceedings' 'costs Orders' 'self Represented Litigants' 'strike Out of Pleadings']

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

Procedural and Other Rulings / Revised Ex Tempore Ruling After the Court Had Refused Leave to Rely on a Further Amended Statement of Claim and Dismissed the Proceedings Earlier the Same Morning

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court should set aside its earlier order dismissing the proceedings.' 'Whether the Court should set aside the costs orders made earlier the same morning.' 'Whether the proposed further amended statement of claim should be considered under UCPR 14.28 after hearing from the parties.']

Ratio Decidendi

The earlier dismissal orders were set aside because the Court concluded on reflection that it should not have dismissed the proceedings of its own motion without first giving the unrepresented plaintiffs an opportunity to be heard about whether they wished to proceed on the confined professional negligence claim against Mr Wall, particularly where the material factual basis of that claim had appeared in iterations of the statements of claim.

Court Disposition

The Court set aside the earlier dismissal of the proceedings and the earlier costs orders, and deferred consideration of the further amended statement of claim under UCPR 14.28 until after hearing from the parties.

Orders

  • ['I set aside the order made this morning dismissing the proceedings.' 'I set aside the orders made this morning regarding costs.' 'I note that the order I made this morning regarding the further amended statement of claim served yesterday evening is subject to consideration pursuant to UCPR 14.28 after hearing from...