Tjiong v Chang (No 2)

The case of *Tjiong v Chang (No 2)* concerned an application to re-open a judgment and set aside orders made by the Court of Appeal of New South Wales. The applicant sought to challenge the original orders on the basis that the Court had overlooked two relevant legal principles.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether it had the power to re-open its previous judgment and set aside the orders under rule 36.16(3A) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW). This involved determining if the grounds raised by the applicant, specifically the alleged overlooking of legal principles, were sufficient to warrant such an intervention, and whether a proposed amendment to the application, which sought to challenge a different order, was made within the permissible time limits.

The Court found that the first legal principle the applicant argued had been overlooked was not a central focus of the original trial or appeal, which had primarily turned on factual disputes. Regarding the second legal principle, the Court determined that it had been dealt with in the appeal judgment and had not been overlooked. Consequently, the Court concluded it lacked the power to entertain the proposed amendment to challenge a different order, as this would be out of time. The Court also addressed applications for reimbursement of costs paid under orders that were sought to be set aside, noting the failure to seek specific orders for reimbursement under UCPR r 51.19.

The Court dismissed the first respondent's motion filed on 13 March 2025 and ordered the first respondent to pay the appellant's costs of that motion. The Court further ordered the first respondent to repay the appellant the sum of $154,116 paid by way of costs, with interest, and to pay the appellant the sum of $4,451.70 for the costs of a costs assessment, with interest. The appellant's amended notice of motion filed on 17 March 2025 was otherwise dismissed with no order as to costs.