Multi-Service Group Pty Ltd (in liq) & Anor v Osborne & Anor

[2010] QCA 72

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Case management
3. › Case-flow management
4. › Deemed resolution of proceedings
5. › Reactivation of proceedings deemed resolved
6. › Principles governing exercise of discretion to reactivate
7. › Whether application for reactivation governed by same principles as dismissal for want of prosecution
8. › Practice Direction No. 4 of 2002 (Qld), para 5.4
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Case management
3. › Case-flow management
4. › Nature and effect of deemed resolution
5. › Whether deemed resolution terminates proceedings or places them in abeyance
6. › Practice Direction No. 4 of 2002 (Qld), paras 5.3, 5.4
1. Appeal
2. › General principles
3. › Interference with discretion of court below
4. › Where discretion exercised on wrong principle
5. › Where decision based on factual error
6. › Whether appellate court should exercise discretion afresh

Quick Take

An application for reactivation of proceedings deemed resolved under Practice Direction No. 4 of 2002 is governed by the criteria in paragraph 5.4 (explanation, justification, and a plan for timely determination), not by the principles applicable to dismissal for want of prosecution or leave to proceed under rr 280 or 389 UCPR. A deemed resolution does not terminate proceedings but places them in a state akin to abeyance, and the threshold for reactivation is lower than for resisting a strike-out application.