Court of Appeal
Supreme Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Mao v AMP Superannuation Limited [2017] NSWCA 296 Hearing dates: 13 November 2017 Date of orders: 13 November 2017 Decision date: 13 November 2017 Before: White JA Decision: Refer to [18] and [19] of judgment.
Catchwords: CIVIL PROCEDURE — Court of Appeal — Stay of proceedings — interlocutory relief sought to stay orders made by primary judge pending application for leave to appeal — orders appointing NSW Trustee & Guardian as manager of part of applicant’s estate under s 41(2) of the NSW Trustee and Guardian Act 2009 (NSW) — mere filing of application for leave to appeal is not a basis to grant stay — no demonstrable basis for staying orders
CIVIL PROCEDURE — Parties — Joinder — application to substitute tutor — appropriate to join solicitors of current tutor to proceedings — leave granted to amend notice of motionLegislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), s 76
NSW Trustee and Guardian Act 2009 (NSW), s 41(2)
Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 (Cth)
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 7.14Cases Cited: Alexander v Cambridge Credit Corporation Ltd (1985) 2 NSWLR 685
Chen v Lym International [2009] NSWCA 121Texts Cited: Nil Category: Principal judgment Parties: Youhua Mao (Applicant)
AMP Superannuation Limited (1st Respondent)
BT Funds Management Limited (2nd Respondent)
AMP Life Limited (3rd Respondent)
AIA Australia Limited (4th Respondent)
NSW Trustee and Guardian (5th Respondent)
Maurice Blackburn Pty Ltd (6th Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
Self Represented (Applicant)
E Esber (1st and 3rd Respondents)
D F Villa (2nd and 4th Respondents)
J Brouwer (5th Respondent)
N/A (6th Respondent)
N/A (Applicant)
Turks Legal (1st-4th Respondents)
NSW Trustee and Guardian (5th Respondent)
N/A (6th Respondent)
File Number(s): 2017/230266 Publication restriction: Nil Decision under appeal
- Court or tribunal:
- Supreme Court of New South Wales
- Jurisdiction:
- Equity Division
- Citation:
- [2017] NSWSC 987
- Date of Decision:
- 26 July 2017
- Before:
- Ward CJ in Eq
- File Number(s):
- 2013/232241
Judgment
-
WHITE JA: On 26 July 2017 Ward CJ in Eq made orders including an order on the Court’s own motion pursuant to s 41(2) of the NSW Trustee and Guardian Act 2009 (NSW) appointing the NSW Trustee and Guardian (the “NSW Trustee”) as manager of so much of the estate of the plaintiff as pertains to the plaintiff’s right, title and interest in proceedings 2013/232241 and in proceedings 2013/244238 (the “Equity proceedings”). Although the statements of claim in those proceedings are not before me, it appears from the judgment of her Honour and other judgments in relation to the applicant (Ms Mao) that she commenced proceedings in 2013 against what has been called the “AMP entities” and the “BT entities”, claiming an entitlement to benefits under superannuation trust deeds for claimed total and permanent disabilities.
-
The background to the orders made by Ward CJ in Eq is set out in her Honour’s judgment and I will not repeat it.
-
On 5 October 2017 the applicant, Ms Mao, filed a summons seeking leave…
Continue reading Mao v AMP Superannuation Limited
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Mao v AMP Superannuation Limited [2017] NSWCA 296
- Case
- [2017] NSWCA 296
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the mere filing of an application for leave to appeal was sufficient grounds to grant a stay of the primary judge's orders. The Court also considered an application to join the solicitors of the current tutor to the proceedings and to amend a notice of motion.
White JA held that the mere filing of an application for leave to appeal does not, in itself, constitute a basis for granting a stay of proceedings. The Court found that there was no demonstrable basis presented by Ms. Mao to justify staying the orders made by the primary judge. Consequently, the application for a stay was refused. The Court also granted leave to amend the notice of motion and ordered that the solicitors of the current tutor be joined to the proceedings.
Orders
Orders of the court
Refer to [18] and [19] of judgment.
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.