Legal Research
Cases
Shreeve v Jourdan

Shreeve v Jourdan

Case [2025] NSWSC 102 26 February 2025

Limitation Periods

Abuse of Process

Appeal

Civil Litigation & Procedure

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Shreeve & Ors v Jourdan [2025] NSWSC 102
Hearing dates: 10 October 2024
Date of orders: 26 February 2025
Decision date: 26 February 2025
Jurisdiction: Common Law
Before: Faulkner J
Decision:
(1) The proceedings are dismissed.
(2) The plaintiffs pay the defendant’s costs.

Catchwords:
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – s 134 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 provides that certain enforcement steps not permissible after 12 years without leave of the Court – fresh action on a judgment debt – whether action an abuse of process – proceedings dismissed.

Legislation Cited:
Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth), s 41
Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), ss 6, 101, 103,133, 134, 138
District Court Act 1973 (NSW), s 83A
Limitation Act 1969 (NSW), s 17
Rules of the Supreme Court (UK), RSC Order 46
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, rr13.4, 14.28

Cases Cited:
Berkeley v Elderkin (1853) 1 EL&BL 805
Bennett v Royal Bank of Scotland [2004] EWCA Civ 988
Brisbane South Regional Authority v Taylor (1996) 186 CLR 541
Chohan v Times Newspapers Limited [2001] 1 WLR 184
Dennehy v Reasonable Endeavours Pty Ltd (2003) 130 FCR 494; [2003] FCAFC 158
Duffy v De Rozzali (1887) 8 LR 153
Fitz-Gibbon v Inspector General in Bankruptcy [2000] FCA 1677
Greville v Bird (1867) 6 SCR (NSW) 253
Habib Bank Ltd v Central Bank of Sudan [2014] EWHC 2288 (Comm)
HK Frost Holdings Pty Ltd (in liq) v Darvall McCutcheon [1999] FCA 795
Hunter v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police [1982] AC 529
John Lewis Food Service Pty Ltd v Mervyn Reynolds [2014] VSCA 162.
Kuwait Oil Tanker Company SAK v Al Bader [2008] EWHC 2432 (Comm)
Lowsley v Forbes [1998] 3 WLR 501
Ogbonna, In the matter of Ogbonna [2023] FCA 1334
Page v McKensey [2009] NSWCA 127
Pyramid Building Society v Terry (1997) 189 CLR 176
Spencer v The Commonwealth (2010) 241 CLR 118
Storey v Lane (1981) 147 CLR 549
Williams v Department of Environment & Resources Management (No.2) [2015] QLAC 1
Williams v Jones (1845) 13 M&W 628; 153 ER 262

Category: Procedural rulings
Parties:
Glenda Alice Shreeve (First Plaintiff)
Colin Bruce Shreeve (Second Plaintiff)
C & G Building Consultants Pty Ltd ACN 106 155 275 as trustee for C & G Unit Trust (Third Plaintiff)
Malachi Corporation Pty Ltd (Fourth Plaintiff)
Raymond Brendan Jourdan (Defendant)
Representation:
Counsel:
E Finnane (Plaintiff)
L Beange (Defendant)
Solicitors:
Uther Webster & Evans Pty Ltd (Plaintiff)
Results Legal (Defendant)

File Number(s): 2018/00085463

JUDGMENT

The essential issue in this case is whether proceedings are an abuse of process when the plaintiff sues afresh on an otherwise stale judgment debt which he or she is no longer able to enforce without leave of the Court. If so, what is the appropriate relief?

Background

The plaintiffs in these proceedings are Glenda Shreeve and Colin Shreeve who are married to each other. Mr Shreeve is the sole director of C & G Building Consultants Pty Ltd and Malachi…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Shreeve v Jourdan

Details

AGLC: Shreeve v Jourdan [2025] NSWSC 102
Case: [2025] NSWSC 102
Decision Date: 26 February 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Shreeve v Jourdan involved a dispute between the plaintiff, Shreeve, and the defendant, Jourdan, regarding the enforcement of a judgment debt. The matter was brought before the Supreme Court of New South Wales. Shreeve sought to enforce a judgment debt against Jourdan that had been made 12 years prior, arguing that the delay did not constitute an abuse of process. Jourdan contended that Shreeve’s attempt to enforce the judgment was an abuse of process due to the significant delay and the potential for prejudice.

The court had to determine whether Shreeve’s attempt to enforce the judgment debt was permissible under s 134 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005, which stipulates that certain enforcement steps are not permissible after 12 years without leave of the Court. The primary legal issue was whether Shreeve’s fresh action on the judgment debt amounted to an abuse of process, considering the extensive delay and the principles governing the enforcement of judgment debts over an extended period.

In examining these issues, the court found that the principles of fairness and justice dictated that Shreeve’s action should be considered an abuse of process. The court emphasised the importance of timely enforcement and the potential for significant prejudice to the defendant if such delays were permitted. Consequently, the court held that Shreeve’s attempt to enforce the judgment debt without leave of the court was an abuse of process and dismissed the proceedings. The court’s decision underscored the need for adherence to statutory provisions that govern the enforcement of judgment debts over time.

Orders