Easton v Griffiths

The proceedings involved Clive Edward Griffiths and others as plaintiffs, and Clive Edward Griffiths, the first defendant, and others, including the sixth defendant, the Commissioner, as respondents. The dispute concerned an application for an abridgment of time to deal with a matter urgently, and the subsequent application for an injunction. The matter was before the High Court of Australia.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether to grant an abridgment of time for the hearing of the application, and whether to grant an injunction. The court also had to consider the positions of the various defendants regarding the application, particularly the second, first, and fourth defendants' willingness to submit to any order made by the court, save for costs, and the fifth defendant's opposition to the injunction. The court also addressed the issue of service on the third and sixth defendants.

The court granted an abridgment of time, noting the urgency of the matter and the lack of opposition from most parties. The first and fourth defendants indicated neutrality and were granted leave to withdraw on the basis of submitting to any order made by the court, except as to costs. The second defendant also submitted to any order, save for costs, and was granted leave to withdraw. The fifth defendant actively opposed the injunction. The court required an affidavit verifying service on the sixth defendant if no appearance was made by that defendant during the day. The plaintiff sought leave to amend the writ of summons.