Randall v City of Canada Bay Council

The appeal concerned an application by Mr. Randall, an undischarged bankrupt, to represent his wife in proceedings seeking to re-open an earlier judgment against her. The original proceedings had been brought by a company, which had since been deregistered, and Mr. Randall sought to re-open that judgment in his capacity as a director and shareholder of the deregistered company. The appeal was heard by Basten, Simpson, and Payne JJA of the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine several legal issues. These included whether leave to appeal was required for Mr. Randall's application, the standing of Mr. Randall, as a director and shareholder of a deregistered company, to seek to re-open a judgment obtained by that company, and whether the "open standing rule" under rule 36.15(1) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) applied to setting aside a judgment in these circumstances. Additionally, the Court considered an application to adduce further evidence, specifically whether the evidence was unavailable at the time of the original trial, with the appellant claiming it had been misplaced.

The Court reasoned that Mr. Randall, as an undischarged bankrupt, required leave to represent his wife. Furthermore, the Court found that Mr. Randall lacked standing to re-open the judgment obtained by the company, particularly as there had been no application to reinstate the deregistered company. The Court also determined that the "open standing rule" did not extend to allowing a director or shareholder of a deregistered company to re-open a judgment obtained by that company. The application to adduce further evidence was also dismissed, as the Court was not satisfied that the evidence had been unavailable at the trial.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal granted leave to appeal to the extent necessary, but dismissed the appeal. The appellant was ordered to pay the Council's costs in the Court of Appeal.