CVW Group Holdings Pty Ltd v Addison

[2011] WASC 267

Supreme Court of Western Australia

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Discovery
3. › Further and better discovery
4. › Inherent jurisdiction of court
5. › Whether insufficiency of discovery appeared from pleadings or affidavit of documents
6. › Whether defendants misconceived their case
7. › Rules of the Supreme Court 1971 (WA), O 26 r 6
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Discovery
3. › Further and better discovery
4. › Application under O 26 r 6
5. › Requirement for supporting affidavit
6. › Whether affidavit complied with O 26 r 6(3)
7. › Rules of the Supreme Court 1971 (WA), O 26 r 6(3)
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Springing orders
3. › Self-executing orders
4. › Discretion to make springing order
5. › Whether circumstances warranted drastic step
6. › Whether conduct contumacious
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Appeal from registrar
3. › Nature of appeal by way of rehearing
4. › Whether appeal exercisable regardless of error
5. › Rules of the Supreme Court 1971 (WA), O 60A r 6

Quick Take

An appeal from a registrar under O 60A r 6 of the Rules of the Supreme Court 1971 (WA) is a rehearing with features of a hearing de novo, meaning the court may exercise its powers regardless of error by the registrar. Springing orders should be made with caution and will ordinarily be inappropriate where a party has not previously failed to comply with court orders and the default is not contumacious. Where an application under O 26 r 6 fails for non-compliance with the affidavit requirements, the court may still order further discovery under its inherent jurisdiction if the insufficiency of discovery appears from the pleadings, affidavit of documents, or a misconception of the case.