Legal Research
Cases
DEF v Trappett

DEF v Trappett

Case [2015] NSWSC 1840 7 December 2015

Standing

Res Judicata

Justiciability

Civil Litigation & Procedure

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Summary available
Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: DEF v Trappett [2015] NSWSC 1840
Hearing dates: 14 August 2015
Date of orders: 07 December 2015
Decision date: 07 December 2015
Jurisdiction: Common Law
Before: Harrison AsJ
Decision:
The Court orders that:

(1) The third defendant’s notice of motion filed 9 July 2015 is dismissed.

(2) The plaintiff is granted leave to file a second further amended statement of claim.

(3) The second further amended statement of claim is to be filed and served on or before 16 December 2015.

(4) Costs are reserved.
(5) The matter is listed for directions at 9.00 am before the Registrar on 3 February 2016.
Catchwords: CIVIL PROCEDURE – application to strike out pleadings – whether pleadings disclose a viable cause of action – justiciability of claims – decisions of voluntary religious organisation – whether Towards Healing protocols of the Catholic Church give rise to enforceable civil rights – justiciability of claims concerning canon law – justiciability of natural justice claim
Legislation Cited: 1983 Code of Canon Law
Federal Court Act 1976 (Cth)
Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW)
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW)
Cases Cited: Ainsworth v Criminal Justice Commission [1992] HCA 10; (1992) 175 CLR 564
Annetts v McCann [1990] HCA 57; (1990) 70 CLR 596
Bird v Campbelltown Anglican Schools Council [2007] NSWSC 1419
Cameron v Hogan [1934] HCA 24; (1934) 51 CLR 358
Carter v NSW Netball Association [2004] NSWSC 737
Clarke v State of New South Wales [2015] NSWSC 1054
Egan v Minister for Transport (Cth) (1976) 14 SASR 445
Ermogenous v Greek Orthodox Community of SA Inc (2002) 209 CLR 95; [2002] HCA 8
Evans (of Robb Evans & Associates) v European Bank Ltd (2004) 61 NSWLR 75; [2004] NSWCA 82
Field v NSW Greyhound Breeders, Owners & Trainers Association Ltd (1972) 2 NSWLR 948
Fisher v Keane (1879) 11 Ch D 353
Gibson v Parkes District Hospital (1991) 26 NSWLR 9
Hospitals Contribution Fund of Australia v Hunt (1982) 44 ALR 365
Macqueen v Frackelton [1909] HCA 28; (1909) 8 CLR 673
McGuirk v University of New South Wales [2009] NSWSC 1424
O’Brien v Bank of Western Australia Ltd [2013] NSWCA 71; (2013) 16 BPR 31,705
Rondel v Worsley (1967) 1 QB 443; [1966] 3 All ER 657
Scandrett v Dowling (1992) 27 NSWLR 483
Shelton v National Roads & Motorists Association Ltd (2004) 51 ACSR 278; [2004] FCA 1393
Spencer v Commonwealth [2010] HCA 28; (2010) 241 CLR 118
Sturt v the Right Reverend Dr Brian Farran Bishop of Newcastle [2012] NSWSC 400
Texts Cited: Truth, Justice and Healing Council, Royal Commission Issues Paper No 2, “Towards Healing”, 30 September 2013
Category: Procedural and other rulings
Parties: DEF (Plaintiff)
Scott Trappett (First Defendant)
Dan-Phoung Nguyen (Second Defendant)
Mark Eustace (Third Defendant)
John Dunford QC (Fourth Defendant)
Most Reverend Archbishop Mark Coleridge (Fifth Defendant)
Representation:
Counsel:
M McAuley (Plaintiff)
M Higgins (Third…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading DEF v Trappett

Details

AGLC: DEF v Trappett [2015] NSWSC 1840
Case: [2015] NSWSC 1840
Decision Date: 07 December 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved an applicant seeking to sue an individual and an entity over alleged sexual abuse and related matters. The respondent moved to strike out the applicant’s pleadings, arguing that the claims were not justiciable and therefore the court should not hear the matter. The applicant opposed the motion and cross-applied to amend the pleadings. The court considered whether the pleadings disclosed a cause of action and whether the claims were justiciable.

The court held that the allegations in the pleadings, if proven, could disclose a cause of action. However, the court found that the claims were not justiciable. The court held that the Towards Healing protocols of the Catholic Church did not give rise to enforceable civil rights. The court found that the applicant's claims concerning canon law and natural justice were not justiciable because they involved questions of ecclesiastical law and internal church procedures, which the court was not equipped to adjudicate.

The court held that the claims were not justiciable and therefore the respondent's motion to strike out the pleadings was granted. The court noted that the applicant was free to pursue other remedies available to her, including seeking redress through the Catholic Church or other appropriate bodies. The court declined to allow the applicant to amend her pleadings, finding that any amendments would not make the claims justiciable.

The court ordered that the applicant's pleadings be struck out and that the respondent pay the applicant’s costs of the application. The court also ordered that the cross-application to amend the pleadings be dismissed.

Orders