Ambulance Service of NSW v Daniel & Anor
Case
•
[2004] NSWCA 406
•11 November 2004
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Ambulance Service of NSW v Daniel [2004] NSWCA 406
[2004] NSWCA 406
11 November 2004
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Ambulance Service of NSW appealed to the Supreme Court of New South Wales against an order made by a single judge. The dispute concerned the costs awarded in a prior appeal.
The primary legal issue before the Court was whether it had the power to amend an order that had already been passed and entered, specifically to correct what was described as an "obvious mistake" in relation to the costs awarded to the second respondent.
The Court applied the "slip rule," which permits the correction of obvious mistakes in judgments or orders. It reasoned that where a mistake is detected by the legal advisers of the parties and is significant, it should be promptly brought to the Court's attention. In this instance, the Court found that the original order contained an obvious error regarding the costs payable to the second respondent.
Consequently, the Court ordered that the original Order 4 made on 9 May 2000 be vacated and replaced with a new order stating that the second respondent was to pay the appellant's costs of the appeal, and if qualified, to have a certificate under the Suitors Fund Act.
The primary legal issue before the Court was whether it had the power to amend an order that had already been passed and entered, specifically to correct what was described as an "obvious mistake" in relation to the costs awarded to the second respondent.
The Court applied the "slip rule," which permits the correction of obvious mistakes in judgments or orders. It reasoned that where a mistake is detected by the legal advisers of the parties and is significant, it should be promptly brought to the Court's attention. In this instance, the Court found that the original order contained an obvious error regarding the costs payable to the second respondent.
Consequently, the Court ordered that the original Order 4 made on 9 May 2000 be vacated and replaced with a new order stating that the second respondent was to pay the appellant's costs of the appeal, and if qualified, to have a certificate under the Suitors Fund Act.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Costs
-
Appeal
-
Remedies
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Finder Earth Pty Ltd v BN and SK Pty Ltd (No 2) [2018] VCC 288
Cases Citing This Decision
3
Allianz Australia Insurance Limited v Crazzi
[2006] NSWSC 1090
Finder Earth Pty Ltd v BN and SK Pty Ltd (No 2)
[2018] VCC 288
Finder Earth Pty Ltd v BN and SK Pty Ltd (No 2)
[2018] VCC 288
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
1