19 May 2017
The court granted summary judgment because the defendant's late third-party pleading and adjournment did not disclose any matter of significance that would constitute a defence to the plaintiff's indemnity claim; the defendant's lack of time to obtain legal advice did not prevent granting summary judgment.
16 Apr 2012
The Court halted the creditor's applications for adjudication under s38 because a substantial related third-party claim (CIV 762) was due for trial imminently, the amount in dispute was large and there was no pressing need for immediate adjudication; those factors justified delaying adjudication until the third-party claim was determined or until 21 May 2012.
27 Apr 2010
Summary judgment was dismissed because the third parties failed to discharge the onus of showing that the first defendants cannot succeed; there are genuine and material conflicts of fact as to who contracted and the scope of personal involvement by the third parties (Hubert and Bower) which cannot be resolved on affidavit evidence and require a full trial assessment.
3 Mar 2006
The court exercised its case management discretion to strike out the proceeding because the parties sought a lengthy adjournment that would impose undue burden on court resources, the parties had long notice of the fixture and could have structured a settlement to deal with outstanding claims, and the plaintiff refused to proceed to trial or discontinue, making striking out the appropriate remedy; no order as to costs was made.