Riva NSW Pty Ltd v Mark A Fraser & Christopher P Clancy trading as Fraser Clancy Lawyers

In the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Riva NSW Pty Ltd (the applicant) sought relief under section 69 of the *Supreme Court Act 1970* (NSW) from orders made by the District Court. The respondents, Mark A Fraser and Christopher P Clancy, trading as Fraser Clancy Lawyers, filed a notice of motion seeking summary dismissal of the applicant's summons. The central issue was that the summons had been filed out of time, and the applicant sought an extension of time to pursue its claim.

The court was required to determine whether there was any prospect of an extension of time being granted to the applicant for filing its summons, and whether, in any event, there was a basis upon which the relief sought in the summons would be granted. The respondents argued for summary dismissal, contending that the applicant's application was doomed to fail.

Emmett JA considered the applicant's prospects of success in obtaining the relief sought from the District Court. His Honour found that the applicant had not demonstrated any error in the District Court's original orders, nor had it established any grounds that would justify setting aside or varying those orders. Consequently, the court concluded that there was no real prospect of the applicant obtaining an extension of time, as there was no underlying merit to the application for relief from the District Court's decision.

Accordingly, the summons filed by Riva NSW Pty Ltd was dismissed with costs. The respondents' notice of motion was otherwise dismissed, with the applicant ordered to pay the respondents' costs of that motion. The costs of these proceedings were ordered to be paid on an indemnity basis.