Tarrant v Statewide Secured Investments Ltd

The applicant, Tarrant, sought leave to appeal from a judgment of Garling J of 9 March 2011, and also sought an adjournment of the proceedings. The respondent was Statewide Secured Investments Ltd. The proceedings concerned an application to reopen a judgment previously made by Adams J on 17 June 2009.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether to grant leave to appeal from Garling J's decision, whether to adjourn the proceedings, and whether the judgment and orders of Adams J should be taken to have been entered on the date they were made, notwithstanding that they had not been properly entered into the court's computerised record system. The court also considered the applicant's intention not to appear to present argument.

McColl and Basten JJA refused the application to adjourn the proceedings, noting the applicant's lack of intention to present argument and the significant delay of approximately two years since the original judgment. The court applied Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 36.11, directing that the judgment and orders of Adams J be taken to have been entered on 17 June 2009, as the orders had not been properly entered into the court's computerised record system. The court also dismissed the summons seeking leave to appeal from Garling J's judgment.

The court ordered that the judgment and orders of Adams J be taken to have been entered on 17 June 2009. The summons seeking leave to appeal from the judgment of Garling J was dismissed. The applicant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs thrown away by an adjournment on 10 August 2011, and the applicant was also ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the application up to and including 12 July 2011.