Singh v Ginelle Pty Ltd

The appeal concerned an application to set aside a consent judgment entered in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The parties involved were Singh and Ginelle Pty Ltd. The dispute arose from a prior judgment that Mr Singh sought to have set aside.

The primary legal issue before the court was the appropriate standard to be applied when considering an application to set aside a judgment entered by consent, particularly when that judgment was obtained in the absence of a party. The court also considered whether an application to overturn a consent judgment should be brought as independent proceedings and the principles governing abuse of process in relation to repeated applications for relief.

The court held that a judgment entered by consent is not subject to a free-ranging discretion to be set aside. Instead, such applications must be decided in accordance with the specific principles identified in *Harvey v Phillips* (1956) 95 CLR 235. These principles require the party seeking to overturn the judgment to bear the onus of establishing sufficient reason for it to be set aside. Furthermore, the court noted that an application to challenge an agreement underlying consent orders and to overturn the subsequent judgment ought to be brought as independent proceedings, although objection to this procedural point could be waived. The court also found that seeking the same relief after a final application had been heard and rejected constituted an abuse of process.

Leave to appeal from the decision of Latham J was granted, but the appeal was dismissed with costs. The application for leave to appeal from the decision of Palmer J was also dismissed with costs.