Johnston v The Greens NSW Incorporated

Link copied
Case Copied 6 min read

Court of Appeal


Supreme Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Johnston v The Greens NSW Incorporated [2020] NSWCA 189
Hearing dates: 21 August 2020
Date of orders: 21 August 2020
Decision date: 21 August 2020
Before: Basten JA, Simpson AJA
Decision:

(1)   Vacate the hearing of the application for leave to appeal.

(2)   Direct that if the matter is not discontinued within 28 days, the applicant shall notify the Registrar as to the status of the proceedings.

(3)   Give leave to each active party to list the matter before the Registrar for further directions on five working days’ notice to the other active parties.

(4)   Otherwise dismiss the amended notice of motion.

(5)   No order as to the costs of today.

Catchwords:

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for leave to appeal – settlement agreement – outstanding issue as to the parties to the agreement – whether proceeding to be discontinued wholly or in part – application to vacate hearing of leave application – costs

Legislation Cited:

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), rr 12.1; 51.56

Category:Procedural and other rulings
Parties: Daryl Lindsay Johnston (Applicant)
The Greens NSW Incorporated (First Respondent)
Christopher Maltby (Second Respondent)
Amalina Wallace (Third Respondent)
David Shoebridge (Fourth Respondent)
Abigail Boyd (Fifth Respondent)
Dawn Walker (Sixth Respondent)
Riki Scanlan (Seventh Respondent)
David Mallard (Eighth Respondent)
Christopher David Harris (Ninth Respondent)
Representation:

Counsel:
Ms R Mansted (Fourth and Fifth Respondents)

Solicitors:
Applicant Self-represented
Marque Lawyers (First Respondent)
Deutsch Miller (Fourth and Fifth Respondents)
Chalk & Behrendt (Sixth Respondent)
Seventh, Eighth and Ninth Respondents self-represented
File Number(s): 2020/52723
 Decision under appeal 
Court or tribunal:
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction:
Equity
Citation:

[2019] NSWSC 215; [2020] NSWSC 10

Date of Decision:
6 March 2019; 16 January 2020
Before:
Robb J
File Number(s):
2019/67490

Judgment

  1. THE COURT: In May 2018 The Greens NSW, a political party seeking to field candidates in a forthcoming election for the Legislative Council, held a pre-selection process. The third person on the ticket adopted as a result of that process was Mr Jeremy Buckingham MP. On 20 December 2018 he resigned his membership of The Greens NSW. As a result, it was necessary to adopt a process which would produce an alternative candidate. The question was whether he should simply be replaced by the person in position number four, or whether there should be a recount of the pre-selection ballot. The party adopted the former position.

  2. The present applicant, Daryl Lindsay Johnston, considered that to be the wrong approach under the party’s Constitution. He and another member of the party commenced proceedings in the Equity Division on 1 March 2019. For the proceedings to have utility, it was necessary for them to be heard and determined with great urgency in order to allow the party to lodge the necessary papers with the Electoral Commission in time for them to participate in the election. The papers had to be lodged by 6 March. With commendable expedition, and with the co-operation of the parties, the proceedings…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Johnston v The Greens NSW Incorporated and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2020] NSWCA 189
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Johnston, sought leave to appeal against a decision of the primary court. The respondent was The Greens NSW Incorporated. A settlement agreement had been reached between the parties, however, an outstanding issue remained regarding the precise parties bound by that agreement, and consequently, whether the proceeding should be wholly or partially discontinued. Johnston applied to vacate the hearing of the application for leave to appeal.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether to vacate the hearing of the application for leave to appeal, and to provide directions regarding the future conduct of the proceedings in light of the settlement agreement and the unresolved issue of party identification. The Court also considered the appropriate orders concerning the costs of the application to vacate.

The Court determined that vacating the hearing was appropriate given the potential for settlement. It directed that if the matter was not discontinued within 28 days, the applicant was to notify the Registrar of the proceedings' status. The Court also granted leave to each active party to list the matter before the Registrar for further directions, requiring five working days' notice. The amended notice of motion was otherwise dismissed, and no order was made as to the costs of the day.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) Vacate the hearing of the application for leave to appeal.

(2) Direct that if the matter is not discontinued within 28 days, the applicant shall notify the Registrar as to the status of the proceedings.

(3) Give leave to each active party to list the matter before the Registrar for further directions on five working days’ notice to the other active parties.

(4) Otherwise dismiss the amended notice of motion.

(5) No order as to the costs of today.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.