TH Drake & Associates Pty Ltd v Safaei

Drake & Associates Pty Ltd commenced proceedings in the Local Court against Safaei, alleging breaches of contract and seeking damages. Safaei subsequently filed a cross-claim in the District Court, arguing that Drake & Associates Pty Ltd had acted negligently and breached statutory obligations. Drake & Associates Pty Ltd applied to transfer the proceedings to the Supreme Court, arguing that the matters were complex and warranted the Supreme Court's oversight. Safaei opposed the transfer. The court was required to decide whether the proceedings met the criteria for transfer under the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) and whether the terms "void" in the Legal Profession Uniform Law (NSW) should be interpreted as void ab initio or void in futuro.

The court found that the matters were not serious, complex, or of public interest, and did not require the protective function of the Supreme Court. The court also considered the interpretation of the term "void" in the Legal Profession Uniform Law (NSW) and concluded that it should be interpreted as void in futuro, meaning that any proceedings initiated by Drake & Associates Pty Ltd were void from the time of initiation, but could be cured by recommencement. The court refused the application for transfer.

The court ordered that Drake & Associates Pty Ltd pay Safaei's costs of the proceeding, in accordance with the Legal Profession Uniform Law (NSW) ss 178 and 185. The court also made an order that any proceedings initiated by Drake & Associates Pty Ltd were void from the time of initiation, but could be cured by recommencement.