Harrison v Schipp

The case of *Harrison v Schipp* concerned a dispute between a solicitor, Mr. Schipp, and his former client, Ms. Harrison. Ms. Harrison sought to reopen a judgment that had been entered against her in previous proceedings, alleging that she had discovered fresh evidence. The matter came before the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether a bill of review for fresh evidence was still available as a procedural mechanism in New South Wales, and if so, what the requirements were for admitting such evidence. The Court also considered the fundamental principle that a court generally has no power to reconsider a perfected judgment.

The Court of Appeal held that the equitable remedy of a bill of review was no longer available in New South Wales, having been superseded by statutory provisions. Furthermore, the Court affirmed that once a judgment is perfected, it cannot be reopened except in limited circumstances, such as where the judgment was obtained by fraud. The Court found that the evidence Ms. Harrison sought to introduce did not meet the stringent requirements for admitting fresh evidence to reopen a perfected judgment, nor did it demonstrate fraud.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal dismissed Ms. Harrison's application with costs.