Lawrence v Ciantar (No 2)

[2020] NSWCA 186

Court of Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

Lawrence v Ciantar (No 2) [2020] NSWCA 186

Hearing dates:

On the papers

Date of orders:

21 August 2020

Decision date:

21 August 2020

Before:

Bathurst CJ; Meagher JA; Gleeson JA

Decision:

(1)   Dismiss the notice of motion filed 26 May 2020.

(2)   Applicant to pay the respondents’ costs of the motion.

Catchwords:

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Court of Appeal – application to re-open decision of the Court – Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 36.16 – the slip rule – procedural fairness

Legislation Cited:

Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014 (NSW), Pt 7

Legal Profession Uniform Law Australian Solicitors’ Conduct Rules 2015, r 27

Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), s 75A

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 36.16, 36.17

Cases Cited:

Akins v National Australia Bank (1994) 34 NSWLR 155

Autodesk Inc v Dyason (No 2) (1993) 176 CLR 300; [1993] HCA 6

Cabassi v Vila (1940) 64 CLR 130; [1940] HCA 41

Expo Aluminium (NSW) Pty Ltd v Pateman Pty Ltd (No 2) [1991] NSWCA 92

Lawrence v Ciantar [2020] NSWCA 89

McDonald v McDonald (1965) 113 CLR 529; [1965] HCA 45

Streetscape Projects (Australia) Pty Ltd v City of Sydney (No 2) [2013] NSWCA 240

Waterhouse v Independent Commission Against Corruption (No 2) [2015] NSWCA 362

Category:

Principal judgment

Parties:

Wayne James Lawrence (Applicant)
Paul William Ciantar (First Respondent)
Alice Sammut (Second Respondent)

Representation:

Counsel:

Solicitors:
Applicant (self-represented)
McLean & Associates (Respondents)

File Number(s):

2019/159837

Publication restriction:

Nil

 Decision under appeal 

Court or tribunal:

Supreme Court

Jurisdiction:

Equity Division

Citation:

[2019] NSWSC 464

Date of Decision:

26 April 2019

Before:

Henry J

File Number(s):

2017/336803

Judgment

1. THE COURT: On 12 May 2020, the Court delivered judgment in this matter dismissing the appeal of Mr Wayne Lawrence against the decision of Henry J on 26 April 2019 dismissing claims by Mr Lawrence that he had an interest in a property owned by the respondents at Angophora Crescent, Forestville, that the respondents had not validly terminated certain agreements between Mr Lawrence and the respondents and that Mr Lawrence was entitled to specific performance of those agreements: Lawrence v Ciantar [2020] NSWCA 89 (the Appeal Judgment).

2. Mr Lawrence filed a notice of motion on 26 May 2020 seeking to reopen the decision of this Court. The motion also seeks ancillary relief that the Appeal Judgment be stayed.

3. In accordance with directions made by the Registrar, the parties filed submissions in relation to the reopening application. After the filing of those submissions, Mr Lawrence forwarded an email to the Registrar on 23 July 2020 seeking leave to amend his reply submissions filed 20 July 2020. He also sought an oral hearing via telephone link “to identify the factual circumstances in [his] submissions”. The respondents indicated they were content for the matter to be dealt with on the papers. Having considered submissions and documents filed by Mr Lawrence in support of the motion, the Court…