Rajski v Bainton

(1990) 22 NSWLR 125; [1991] NSWCA 232

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Judgments and Orders
3. › Setting aside — jurisdiction to set aside own orders — RSC Pt 40 r 9(1) — inherent jurisdiction — power to be exercised sparingly — exceptional circumstances required
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Judgments and Orders
3. › Entry of orders — effect of entry — whether entry prevents review — notice of motion filed before entry
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Reasons for Judgment
3. › Duty to give reasons — extent of duty — failure to address every submission — whether omission constitutes reviewable error
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Appeal
3. › Application to review appellate judgment — grounds — alleged failure to consider arguments — alleged misunderstanding — finality of litigation

Quick Take

The NSW Court of Appeal held that it has jurisdiction under Pt 40 r 9(1) and its inherent power to set aside or reconsider its own orders where a notice of motion is filed before entry, and that entry of orders after such filing does not defeat the application. However, the jurisdiction must be exercised sparingly and only in quite exceptional circumstances, balancing alleged error against the public interest in finality of litigation. On the merits, the Court held that the applicant failed to establish that the Court had overlooked or misunderstood his arguments, and that even if the arguments had been overlooked, they were incapable of raising a triable issue. [name withheld] additionally held that the failure to address every submission in reasons for judgment does not constitute a default warranting reconsideration, and that reasons need only state the broad outlines and constitutive facts supporting the orders made.