Glavan v Abigroup Contractors

The proceedings were initiated in the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia between the plaintiff, Glavan, and three defendants, including Abigroup Contractors. The dispute centred around a consent judgment that had been entered into between the first defendant and the plaintiff. The third defendant sought to set aside the consent judgment and also applied for an adjournment to allow the matter to be determined at the substantive hearing. The court was tasked with determining whether the principles in James Hardie & Co Pty Limited v Seltsam Pty Limited applied to the consent judgment between the tortfeasors and if the application for an adjournment was appropriate.

The court considered whether the consent judgment could be set aside under the principles established in James Hardie & Co Pty Limited v Seltsam Pty Limited, which generally provide that a consent judgment between tortfeasors does not bind a third party unless there are exceptional circumstances. The court also had to decide if the application for an adjournment was warranted to allow the issue to be determined at the substantive hearing. The court determined that the principles in James Hardie applied, and there were no exceptional circumstances to set aside the consent judgment. Additionally, the application for an adjournment was denied as it was not necessary for the determination of the substantive issues.

The court held that the consent judgment between the first defendant and the plaintiff did not bind the third defendant. Consequently, the application to set aside the consent judgment was dismissed. Furthermore, the application for an adjournment was also dismissed, as it was not necessary to have the issue determined at the substantive hearing. No further orders were made by the court in relation to these applications.