Rodgers v ANZ Banking Group Ltd

The Supreme Court of Queensland heard an application by ANZ Banking Group Limited against Stephen Alexander Rodgers and Roslyn Rodgers. The ANZ sought to strike out the plaintiffs' claim for wages in paragraph 33 of their statement of claim, arguing that it was an abuse of process and precluded by the judgment in an earlier action. The court had to decide whether the plaintiffs' claim was precluded by the findings in the earlier action, whether the claim amounted to an abuse of process, and whether the claim for lost wages was recoverable. The court found that the claim was not precluded by the earlier judgment, was not an abuse of process, and the claim for lost wages was unsustainable and should be struck out. The court dismissed the application to strike out the claim and ordered the ANZ to pay the plaintiffs' costs of the application on the standard basis. The court found that the plaintiffs' claim was not precluded by the earlier judgment because the issues raised in the third action were not necessarily inconsistent with the continuing validity and enforceability of the ANZ's securities. The court found that the claim was not an abuse of process because the plaintiffs were not seeking an outcome inconsistent with the outcome in the first action. The court found that the claim for lost wages was unsustainable because it was a reflective loss of the companies and should be claimed by the companies.