Fischer v Nemeske Pty Ltd (No 2)

The appellants, Fischer, sought to re-open a judgment previously delivered by the Court of Appeal of New South Wales in proceedings against the respondent, Nemeske Pty Ltd. The dispute concerned an application to re-open the judgment after it had been handed down.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether it should exercise its discretion to re-open the judgment. This involved considering whether there was any "matter of principle" that warranted such an exceptional step.

The Court of Appeal determined that the appellants had not demonstrated any matter of principle that justified re-opening the judgment. The Court applied the established legal principles governing the re-opening of judgments, which generally require a compelling reason, such as a significant error or a matter of public importance, to be shown. In this instance, no such compelling reason was found.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appellants' motion seeking re-opening and ordered that they pay the respondent's costs.