TIMCAL PTY LTD v SONS OF GWALIA LTD (Subject to Deed of Company Arrangement) [No 2]

[2011] WASC 58

Supreme Court of Western Australia

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Inactive Cases List
3. › Deemed dismissal for want of prosecution
4. › Whether notice to parties is precondition to deemed dismissal
5. › Whether failure to give notice is mere irregularity
6. › Rules of the Supreme Court 1971 (WA), O 4A rr 25, 28
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Dismissal for want of prosecution
3. › Inherent jurisdiction
4. › Relevant considerations
5. › Length of and explanation for delay
6. › Prejudice to parties
7. › Whether delay inordinate or inexcusable
1. Statutory Interpretation
2. › Mandatory procedural requirements
3. › Whether breach invalidates subsequent act
4. › Whether legislative purpose requires compliance as precondition
5. › Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355 applied

Quick Take

Under the WA Supreme Court Rules, the Principal Registrar's failure to give written notice under O 4A r 25(1)(b) that a case has been placed on the Inactive Cases List prevents the deemed dismissal for want of prosecution under O 4A r 28(1) from taking effect. This departs from the approach in Owners of Riviera Apartments v Wembley Lakes Estate Pty Ltd, which treated the failure as a mere irregularity.