Mao v AMP Superannuation Limited (No. 2)

The Court of Appeal of New South Wales considered an application by the applicant, Mao, seeking to set aside orders made by the Court itself. The dispute arose from an earlier hearing where the applicant contended that a miscarriage of justice had occurred. The applicant sought a direction that the Court's previous orders not be entered and a declaration that the earlier hearing had been vitiated by a miscarriage of justice.

The central legal issues before the Court were whether it had failed to consider the applicant's submissions and materials, and whether these alleged failures constituted a miscarriage of justice warranting the setting aside of its own orders. The Court was required to balance the applicant's claims against the fundamental legal principle of the finality of litigation.

In its reasoning, the Court found that it had indeed considered the applicant's submissions and evidence presented during the earlier hearing. Consequently, the Court concluded that there had been no failure to consider the applicant's case and therefore no miscarriage of justice had occurred. The Court affirmed the principle of finality in litigation, indicating that such applications to set aside a court's own orders are exceptional and require compelling grounds.

The application was refused, and the Court ordered that its previous orders be entered.