Dockpride Pty Ltd v Subiaco Redevelopment Authority

[2006] WASCA 287

DOCKPRIDE PTY LTD & ANOR -v- SUBIACO REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY [2006] WASCA 287

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2006] WASCA 287
Court:	THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA)
Case No:	CACV:133/2005	Heard:	8 DECEMBER 2006
Coram:	PULLIN JA	Delivered:	7/12/06
No of pages:	3	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Appeal dismissed
Category:	B
PDF Version

Parties:	DOCKPRIDE PTY LTD WESTPOINT CORPORATION PTY LTD SUBIACO REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Catchwords:	Practice and procedure Application to dismiss appeal for failure to comply with Court of Appeal Rules Turns on own facts
Legislation:	Supreme Court (Court of Appeal) Rules 2005 (WA), r 43(2)(g)(ii)
Case References:	Nil Nil

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA) CITATION : DOCKPRIDE PTY LTD & ANOR -v- SUBIACO REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY [2006] WASCA 287 CORAM : PULLIN JA HEARD : 8 DECEMBER 2006 DELIVERED : 8 DECEMBER 2006 FILE NO/S : CACV 133 of 2005 BETWEEN : DOCKPRIDE PTY LTD

First Appellant

WESTPOINT CORPORATION PTY LTD
Second Appellant

AND

SUBIACO REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:

Jurisdiction : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram : LE MIERE J

Citation : DOCKPRIDE PTY LTD & ANOR -v- SUBIACO REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY [2005] WASC 211

File No : CIV 1505 of 1999

(Page 2)

Catchwords:

Practice and procedure - Application to dismiss appeal for failure to comply with Court of Appeal Rules - Turns on own facts

Legislation:

Supreme Court (Court of Appeal) Rules 2005 (WA), r 43(2)(g)(ii)

Result:

Appeal dismissed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

First Appellant : No appearance
Second Appellant : No appearance
Respondent : Mr S N Standing

Solicitors:

First Appellant : No appearance
Second Appellant : No appearance
Respondent : Freehills

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Nil

Case(s) also cited:

Nil

(Page 3)

1 PULLIN JA: This is an application to dismiss an appeal pursuant to r 43(2)(g)(ii) of the Supreme Court (Court of Appeal Rules) 2005 (WA). The appeal was instituted by Dockpride and Westpoint against the judgment of Le Miere J determining a preliminary issue in favour of the Subiaco Redevelopment Authority. The appeal notice was filed on 13 October 2005. Westpoint was in liquidation and receivers were appointed.

2 On 7 February 2006 the respondent consented to the postponement of a Registrar's conference to settle the appeal book index because receivers had just been appointed to Westpoint. It was relisted for hearing on 12 April 2006. On 11 April 2006 the appellant's solicitor Williams and Hughes advised that they would be terminating their retainer.

3 On 12 April 2006 the solicitors for the appellants attended before the Registrar and said they had terminated or would be terminating their retainer, and would be applying to take themselves off the record. On the same day the solicitors for the respondent wrote agreeing to a proposal which had been made to dismiss the appeal and sent a consent order to Williams and Hughes but there was no response.

4 Clayton Utz subsequently advised that they had no funds to consider the matter on behalf of the liquidator of Westpoint. In June 2006, Williams and Hughes were given leave to cease acting for Dockpride and Westpoint. An order was made by McLure J on 16 August 2006 requiring the parties attend by solicitors to settle the appeal book index, but specifying that this should not occur before the expiration of three months.

5 On 1 November 2006 the date was fixed for the settling of the appeal book index. There was no attendance by solicitors for the appellants or for anyone on behalf of the appellants. There was therefore non-compliance with the order of McLure J and so, pursuant to r 43(2)(g)(ii), I would dismiss the appeal and make orders in terms of the minute.