Clark v Robards (No 3)

In *Clark v Robards (No 3)*, the applicant sought to reopen a judgment previously handed down by the New South Wales Court of Appeal. The application was brought by the applicant, who claimed to be a person under legal incapacity, seeking to set aside the earlier judgment.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the applicant qualified as a person under legal incapacity for the purposes of rule 7.13 of the *Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005* (NSW). This rule permits a person under legal incapacity to seek to have a judgment set aside if certain conditions are met. The Court also considered whether the grounds raised by the applicant constituted an "irregularity" in the judgment, particularly in circumstances where the matters now sought to be raised were available to be, but were not, raised at the original hearing.

The Court reasoned that the applicant had not established that they were a person under legal incapacity within the meaning of rule 7.13. Furthermore, the Court found that the issues raised by the applicant did not amount to an "irregularity" in the judgment. The Court emphasised that relief under such provisions is exceptional and requires a compelling case, which was not made out on the facts presented. The applicant's failure to raise the matters at the original hearing, despite having the opportunity to do so, weighed against the granting of the extraordinary relief sought.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s notice of motion filed on 17 November 2016.