Sebie v Pham (No 2)

[2021] NSWCA 274

Court of Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

Sebie v Pham (No 2) [2021] NSWCA 274

Hearing dates:

21 October 2021

Date of orders:

21 October 2021

Decision date:

21 October 2021

Before:

Bell P at [1];
Basten JA at [10];
Brereton JA at [11]

Decision:

Notice of Motion dismissed with indemnity costs, such costs to be payable out of the fund held by the Court in the proceedings the subject of the application for leave to appeal.

Catchwords:

CIVIL PROCEDURE – Court of Appeal – Application – Notice of Motion seeking various orders – Where legal representatives unable to advance any submissions in support of motion – Where Court has serious reservations as to whether party who signed motion in fact filed it – Inability of party to answer basic questions from the Bench or advance any submissions in support of motion – Correspondence from misspelled email address – Court being trifled with – Motion dismissed with indemnity costs

CIVIL PROCEDURE – Parties – Joinder – Application to reinstate company as appellant after misconceived attempt to circumvent requirement of representation by joining director instead

Legislation Cited:

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), rr 7.1(3), 13.6

Cases Cited:

Sebie v Pham [2021] NSWCA 115

Category:

Procedural rulings

Parties:

Robert Sebie (First Applicant)
Ronald Jemmott (Second Applicant)
Andy Vuong Duc Pham (First Respondent)
Thi Huong Giang Pham (Second Respondent)
ENA Development Pty Ltd (Third Respondent)

Representation:

Counsel:
Self-represented (Applicants)
B Zipser (First and Second Respondents)
C Alis (sol) (Third Respondent)

Solicitors:
Andy Pham Lawyers (First and Second Respondents)
Adam Jones Solicitor (Third Respondent)

File Number(s):

2021/133082

 Decision under appeal 

Court or tribunal:

Supreme Court

Jurisdiction:

Equity Division

Citation:

[2017] NSWSC 446;

[2018] NSWSC 381;

[2019] NSWSC 115;

[2020] NSWSC 1089;

[2021] NSWSC 542.

Date of Decision:

26 April 2017

Before:

Pembroke J;
Slattery J;
Slattery J;
Sackar J;
Sackar J.

File Number(s):

2015/325044; 2015/56505

Judgment (ex tempore)

1. BELL P: The Court has before it a notice of motion e-filed on 18 October 2021. The first prayer for relief in this notice of motion is that:

“ENA Development Pty Ltd remains as the second appellant in these proceedings and not a respondent. That Ronald Jemmott is added as the third appellant pursuant to rule UCRP [sic] 7.1 (2) and (3).”

The proceedings referred to in prayer 1 were an application for leave to appeal in which Mr Robert Sebie is the first applicant (wrongly referred to as “first appellant”) and in which ENA Development Pty Ltd (ENA) was removed as the second applicant by order of the Registrar on 30 August 2021.

2. When the motion was called for hearing this morning, Mr Christopher Alis of Adam Jones Solicitor purported to announce his appearance as agent for ENA. After questioning from the Court as to whether or not that firm of solicitors would enter an appearance on behalf of ENA as the moving party on the notice of motion, Mr Alis ultimately…