De Saram v Brown

In the matter of De Saram v Brown, the defendant appealed against the granting of summary judgment and the striking out of a counterclaim. The dispute involved an allegation of breach of fiduciary duty and the defendant's counterclaim for damages. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria, Court of Appeal.

The legal issues the court was required to decide were whether the defendant's defence had a real prospect of success, and whether the trial judge had correctly exercised his discretion in striking out the counterclaim. The court considered the relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Act 2010 and the County Court Civil Procedure Rules 2008, particularly in relation to the standard for granting summary judgment and the requirements for a valid counterclaim.

The court found that the trial judge had erred in his assessment of the defendant's defence, and that there was indeed a real prospect of success. The court also found that the trial judge had erred in striking out the counterclaim, as the defendant had not been in contempt of court as found, and there were no grounds for striking out the counterclaim. The appeal was therefore allowed in part, with the counterclaim being reinstated. The court also made orders for the expedition of the counterclaim to ensure that the matter was dealt with as efficiently as possible.

The court ordered that the defendant's counterclaim be reinstated and that the matter be expedited. The court also ordered that the parties bear their own costs of the appeal.