Batiste v Gilmour-Latham

The parties in this matter were Batiste (the applicant) and Gilmour-Latham (the respondent). The dispute concerned an application to set aside a default judgment. The case came before the Court of Appeal of New South Wales, comprising Giles, Heydon and Hodgson JJA.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether it was permissible for a court to order a defendant to provide security for the amount claimed as a term for setting aside a default judgment, and if so, whether the amount of security ordered in this particular instance was appropriate.

The Court of Appeal considered the principles governing the setting aside of default judgments, which generally require a defendant to show a meritorious defence and that the application is made promptly. The Court then addressed the question of whether security could be ordered as a condition. While not explicitly detailed in the provided text, the court's decision implies that such a condition is permissible in certain circumstances, and the focus then shifted to the appropriateness of the specific amount of security ordered.

In relation to the order made by Bowden ADCJ, leave to appeal was refused. However, in relation to the orders made by Cooper DCJ, leave to appeal was granted, but the appeal itself was dismissed.