Coshott v Barry (No 2)

The matter before the court involved an application by the defendant, Barry, to reopen the case after the plaintiff, Coshott, had been granted judgment in default. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The dispute centred around the defendant's request to set aside the default judgment and to allow the case to proceed to a full hearing on the merits, on the grounds that the court had overlooked certain relevant authorities that might have influenced the outcome of the case.

The legal issue that the court was required to address was whether the court had the authority to reopen a case after delivering reasons for judgment but before making the orders. The court also needed to determine if the defendant's failure to draw the court's attention to the relevant authorities constituted an operative misapprehension of the law, which would warrant reopening the case.

The court found that the power to reopen a case after delivering reasons for judgment but before making orders was limited and should only be exercised in exceptional circumstances. The court held that the defendant's failure to bring the relevant authorities to the court's attention did not constitute an operative misapprehension of the law, and therefore, the court declined to reopen the case. The court emphasised that parties have a responsibility to ensure that all relevant authorities are brought to the court's attention to avoid any potential errors in the judgment. The court also noted that the defendant's delay in applying to reopen the case further undermined the case for reopening.

The court dismissed the defendant's application to reopen the case and ordered that the default judgment granted to the plaintiff be made absolute.