District Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Liristis and Anor v White [2024] NSWDC 557 Hearing dates: 12, 25 November 2024 Date of orders: 26 November 2024 Decision date: 26 November 2024 Jurisdiction: Civil Before: Abadee DCJ Decision: See paragraph [91]
Catchwords: CIVIL PROCEDURE – transfer of proceeding from Local Court to District Court – first plaintiff commenced Local Court proceeding for property damage to a motor vehicle arising from an accident – whilst Local Court proceeding pending, first plaintiff commences a proceeding in the District Court based on the same accident, but with an added claim for damages for personal injury – transfer application determined adversely to the plaintiff by a Judge of the Court – whether transfer application was properly before the Judge – presumption of regularity – subsequent to that adverse determination, whether first plaintiff has file a Summons in the District Court through which he brings the same transfer application – consideration of principles relating to successive interlocutory applications
CIVIL PROCEDURE – recusal application after resumption of a hearing that was part-heard
CIVIL PROCEDURE – transfer application abandoned – plaintiff applies for leave to discontinue – contest over costs consequences – whether reasonable for the plaintiff to have commenced the proceeding
Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), ss, 56, 60, 140(2)
Motor Accident Injury Act 2017 (NSW), ss, 4.1-4.2
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), rr, 6.2-6.4, 6.6, 15.12, 18, 36.15-16
Cases Cited: Bajramovic v Calubaquid (2015) 71 MVR 15
Gunter v State Transit Authority of NSW (2004) 61 NSWLR 414
Liu v The Age Company Pty Ltd (2016) 92 NSWLR 679
Minister for Natural Resources v NSW Aboriginal Council (1987) 9 NSWLR 154
Restaino v Urban Purveyor Group Pty Ltd [2021] NSWSC 1164
Zakaria v Noyce [2012] NSWSC 981
Collier v Country Women’s Association of NSW [2018] NSWCA 36
Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy (2000) 205 CLR 337
Re JRL; Ex p CJL (1986) 161 CLR 342
Texts Cited: Nil
Category: Procedural rulings Parties: Mr Tony Liristis (Plaintiff)
Mr Brian White (Defendant)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
Plaintiff (Self-represented)
Mr J Sukkar (Defendant)
Hall & Wilcox Lawyers (Defendant)
File Number(s): 2024/00400930 Publication restriction: Nil
JUDGMENT
Background
The Local Court proceeding
-
On 3 November 2023 Mr Tony Liristis commenced a proceeding solely in his own name against Brian Leslie White in the Penrith Local Court number 2023/349643 (the Local Court Proceeding). It was filed in the form of an Unliquidated Statement of Claim. By that proceeding, Mr Liristis brought a claim for damages arising from the collision of two vehicles on 26 October 2023. Notwithstanding the description of his claim as being ‘unliquidated’, under the section of the Court document titled “Relief Claimed”, at point one, it was indicated that what Mr Liristis sought was an order that Mr White pay a sum of $12,650. In his pleading, Mr Liristis alleged that he was using his vehicle to pick up food…
Continue reading Liristis v White
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Liristis v White [2024] NSWDC 557
- Case
- [2024] NSWDC 557
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The key legal issues before the court included whether the transfer application was properly before the judge, the presumption of regularity, and the principles governing successive interlocutory applications. The court examined the circumstances in which the transfer application was made and whether the judge was properly seized of the application. The court also considered whether the first plaintiff had acted reasonably in commencing the proceeding and whether the principles of successive interlocutory applications applied. Additionally, the court evaluated the validity of the recusal application and the consequences of discontinuing the proceeding after the transfer application had been abandoned.
The court found that the transfer application was properly before the judge, and the presumption of regularity applied. The court held that the first plaintiff's second application for transfer in the District Court was an abuse of process and dismissed it. The recusal application was also dismissed as it was considered an afterthought and not made in good faith. Regarding the discontinuance of the proceeding, the court found that it was reasonable for the plaintiff to have commenced the proceeding and granted leave to discontinue without costs to the defendant.
The orders of the court included dismissing the second transfer application, denying the recusal application, and granting leave to discontinue the proceeding without costs to the defendant.
Orders
Orders of the court
See paragraph [91]
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.