NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL
CITATION: CALDAR v PUBLIC TRUSTEE & ORS [2003] NSWCA 187
FILE NUMBER(S):
40345/03
HEARING DATE(S): 7 July 2003
JUDGMENT DATE: 07/07/2003
PARTIES:
Russell Caldar (Estate of the late Mrs Rachel Isabell Gittoes)
v
Public Trustee of New South Wales and
Allan Ramon Gittoes and
Registrar-General, Land and Property Information Office
JUDGMENT OF: Handley JA Ipp JA Tobias JA
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: Supreme Court
LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): ED 121784/02, ED 119481/01
LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Santow JA, Campbell J, Barrett J
COUNSEL:
Appellant: Mr Caldar in person
Respondent 1: I R Rugless, Solicitor, for Public Trustee
Respondent 2: No appearance
Respondent 3: G Channell, Solicitor, for Registrar-General
SOLICITORS:
Appellant: In person
Respondent 1: Gibson Owen Lawyer, Inc
Respondent 2: No appearance
Respondent 3: K C Hall, Solicitor for Registrar-General
CATCHWORDS:
APPEAL - interlocutory judgment or order - refusal to set aside grant of administration in common form interlocutory
LEGISLATION CITED:
Supreme Court Act
DECISION:
Appeal be struck out as incompetent. Opponent pay the claimants' costs of notices of motion of 12 and 16 June
Notice of motion dated 6 June to review the orders of Santow JA dismissed with costs.
JUDGMENT:
IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COURT OF APPEAL
40345/03
ED 121784/02 ED 119481/01
HANDLEY JA
IPP JA
TOBIAS JA
7 July 2003
RUSSELL CALDAR v PUBLIC TRUSTEE OF NSW & ORS
Judgment
HANDLEY JA: The Court has before it a notice of motion filed on behalf of the Public Trustee on 12 June, and another notice of motion filed on behalf of Land and Property Information New South Wales on 16 June, which seek orders that Mr Caldar’s notice of appeal filed on 29 April from the judgment of Campbell J of 28 April be dismissed as incompetent. Those summonses are supported by the affidavits of Margaret Pringle of 24 June, in support of the notice of motion by the Public Trustee, and of Anna Brann of 27 June, in support of the notice of motion by Land and Property Information.
The Court has also been furnished with a chronology of events since Mr Caldar filed his first probate caveat in December 2001.
The orders sought in the notice of appeal from Campbell J are that the Letters of Administration granted to the Public Trustee be revoked, an order for costs, damages against the Public Trustee and Mr Gittoes and an order that a caveat lodged against the title to the real estate forming the principal asset of the estate of Mr Caldar’s deceased mother be reinstated.
Section 101(2) of the Supreme Court Act provides that an appeal shall not lie to the Court of Appeal except by leave of the Court of Appeal from (e) an interlocutory judgment or order in proceedings in the Court; and (r) a final judgment or order in proceedings in the Court other than an appeal that involves a matter at issue amounting to or to the value of $100,000.
A grant of…
Continue reading Caldar v Public Trustee
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Caldar v Public Trustee [2003] NSWCA 187
- Case
- [2003] NSWCA 187
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was whether the appeal against the refusal to set aside the grant of administration was competent. This required the court to consider the nature of the order sought to be appealed and the relevant rules governing appeals from interlocutory decisions.
The court determined that the appeal was incompetent. It reasoned that the order refusing to set aside the grant of administration in common form was not a final judgment or order, but rather an interlocutory one. Under the relevant rules of court, appeals from such interlocutory orders generally require leave, which had not been sought or granted in this instance. Consequently, the appeal was struck out as incompetent. The court also dismissed a notice of motion to review prior orders with costs.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appeal be struck out as incompetent. Opponent pay the claimants' costs of notices of motion of 12 and 16 June
Notice of motion dated 6 June to review the orders of Santow JA dismissed with costs.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.