Radovanov v Bogunovic

The Supreme Court of New South Wales, Court of Appeal, heard an appeal concerning the application of the slip rule. The parties involved were the appellant, Radovanov, and the respondent, Bogunovic. The dispute centred on whether the slip rule, which allows courts to correct errors in judgments, could be invoked when circumstances had changed since the original judgment was handed down.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the slip rule, as codified in rules such as rule 36.16 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), could be applied to correct a judgment where the factual circumstances relevant to the judgment had altered after its pronouncement. This raised questions about the scope and limitations of the court's power to amend its own orders.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, affirming that the slip rule is intended to correct errors arising from the court's own oversight or misstatement in expressing its manifest intention, not to alter the judgment to reflect changed circumstances or to give a party a second chance to argue a point. The court reasoned that the rule does not permit a court to re-examine or vary its decision on the merits, particularly when the alleged error stems from a change in facts or law occurring after the judgment was delivered. The court emphasised that the slip rule is a procedural mechanism for rectifying clerical mistakes or errors arising from an accidental slip or omission, not a tool for substantive variation of a concluded judgment.

Consequently, the appeal was dismissed with costs.