Champerslife Pty Ltd v Manojlovski & Anor

(2010) 75 NSWLR 245; [2010] NSWCA 33

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Estoppel
2. › Res judicata
3. › Anshun estoppel
4. › Extended res judicata
5. › Test of unreasonableness
6. › Whether matter should have been raised not merely could have been raised
7. › Whether failure to apply for joinder or transfer unreasonable
8. › Similarity of substance of claim not per se unreasonable
1. Estoppel
2. › Res judicata
3. › Anshun estoppel
4. › Cross-claims
5. › Whether defendant unreasonable in not cross-claiming in earlier proceedings
6. › Whether additional matters in cross-claim were substantial
7. › Greater scope for justifiable refusal to cross-claim
1. Estoppel
2. › Res judicata
3. › Privies
4. › Privity of interest
5. › Whether sole director and shareholder is privy of company
6. › Whether company claims under or through director
7. › Separate legal identity of company
1. Estoppel
2. › Res judicata
3. › Anshun estoppel
4. › Privies
5. › Whether Anshun estoppel applicable to privies
6. › Whether estoppel binding director binds company controlled by director

Quick Take

A company is not Anshun estopped merely because its sole director/shareholder could have caused it to seek joinder in earlier proceedings; the test remains whether it was unreasonable not to do so. A sole director/shareholder is not a privy of the company for Anshun estoppel purposes because the company does not claim under or through the director. The question whether a controlling shareholder can be a privy of the company (the converse situation) was left open.