| SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND | |
CITATION: | Rodgers v ANZ Banking Group Ltd & Anor [2005] QSC 365 |
PARTIES: | STEPHEN ALEXANDER RODGERS and ROSLYN RODGERS |
| (Plaintiffs/Respondents) | |
| v | |
| AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND BANKING GROUP LIMITED (ABN 11 005 357 522) | |
| (First Defendant/Applicant) | |
| and | |
| MINTER ELLISON LAWYERS | |
| (Second Defendant/Applicant) | |
FILE NO: | S319/2005 |
DIVISION: | Trial Division |
DELIVERED ON: | 8 December 2005 |
DELIVERED AT: | Rockhampton |
HEARING DATE: | 22 August 2005 |
JUDGE: | Dutney J |
ORDER: | Action S319 of 2005 filed in Rockhampton Registry be struck out |
CATCHWORDS: | PRACTICE – APPLICATION – STRIKE OUT – where the first defendant commenced an action against the plaintiff to recover money payable under a written guarantee and recovery of possession of mortgaged property – where the judgment was given against the plaintiff – where the plaintiff appealed against findings of fact – where appeal was dismissed – where the plaintiff sought special leave to appeal to the High Court – where special leave refused – where the plaintiff alleges orders in the original proceedings were obtained by fraud – where the plaintiff seeks to reopen decision of the trial judge and subsequent appeal and special leave application – whether the plaintiff’s pleadings are embarrassing – whether proceedings amount to abuse of process PRACTICE – ACTION – SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT – where the plaintiff alleges fresh evidence emerged after the conclusion of initial proceedings – where the fresh evidence does not establish the judgment was produced by the fraud of the first defendant – where new fresh evidence is not material to affect the outcome of the trial ANZ Banking Group Ltd v Rodgers & Anor [2003] QSC 304, cited. ANZ Banking Group Ltd v Rodgers & Anor [2004] QCA 186, cited. Assets Co Ltd v Mere Roihi [1905] AC 176, cited. Birch v Birch [1902] P 130 at 135, cited. Boughen v Abel [1987] 1 Qd R 138, applied. Butler v Fairclough (1917) 23 CLR 78, cited. Charles Bright & Co Ltd v Sellar [1904] 1 KB 6, cited. D’Orta-Ekenaike v Victorian Legal Aid (2005) 29 ALJR 755, cited. Emanuel Management Pty Ltd v Foster’s Brewing Group Ltd [2000] QSC 430, cited. Henderson v Henderson (1843) 3 Hare 100, cited. Jonesco v Beard [1930] AC 298, cited. McDonald v McDonald (1965) 113 CLR 529, cited. McHarg v Woods Radio Pty Ltd [1948] VLR 496, cited. Monroe Schenider Associates Inc v No 1 Raberem Pty Ltd (No 2) (1992) 37 FCR 234, cited/applied. Port of Melbourne Authority v Anshun (1981) 147 CLR 589, followed/applied. Pyramid Building Society (in liq) v Scorpion Hotels Pty Ltd [1988] 1 VR 188, cited. The Ampthill Peerage Case [1977] AC 547, cited. Wentworth v Rogers (No 5) (1986) 6 NSWLR 534, cited/followed. Yat Tung Investment Co Ltd v Dao Hing Bank Ltd [1975] AC 581, cited. Young v Hoger [2001] QCA 453, cited. Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), r 171, 667. |
COUNSEL: | Plaintiff/Respondent in person Mr. J. D. McKenna… |
Continue reading Rodgers v ANZ Banking Group Ltd
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Rodgers v ANZ Banking Group Ltd [2005] QSC 365
- Case
- [2005] QSC 365
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court held that the plaintiff's pleadings were indeed embarrassing as they did not provide a proper basis for the relief sought. The plaintiff had not presented any fresh evidence that established that the judgment was obtained by fraud. Furthermore, the new evidence presented was not material enough to affect the outcome of the trial. The court found that the plaintiff was attempting to relitigate issues that had already been determined by the higher courts. The court held that the proceedings amounted to an abuse of process, as the plaintiff was using the legal system for an improper purpose. The court concluded that the plaintiff's application to strike out the proceedings was well-founded and ordered the action to be struck out.
Orders
Orders of the court
Action S319 of 2005 filed in Rockhampton Registry be struck out
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.