Aldous v Commonwealth Bank of Australia

Aldous (the applicant) sought leave to appeal against a judgment entered in favour of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (the respondent). The dispute arose from the respondent entering judgment against the applicant when the applicant failed to comply with the terms of a settlement deed. The application for leave to appeal was heard by Beazley P and Leeming JA in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the applicant had demonstrated an injustice that went beyond merely arguable. This required the Court to consider the threshold for granting leave to appeal in circumstances where a judgment had been entered pursuant to a consent order or settlement deed, and the applicant alleged a failure to comply with that deed.

The Court of Appeal applied the principles governing applications for leave to appeal, particularly in the context of consent orders and settlement deeds. Their Honours considered the applicant's arguments and found that they did not meet the necessary threshold of demonstrating an injustice that was more than merely arguable. The Court concluded that the applicant had not established sufficient grounds to warrant granting leave to appeal.

Consequently, the summons for leave to appeal was dismissed, and the applicant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs.