In purely equitable proceedings where there is a corresponding remedy at law subject to a statutory bar, equity will apply the bar by analogy unless there exists an equitable ground (such as concealed fraud) making it unconscionable for the defendant to rely on the statute. Equity does not retain a broader residual discretion based on the doctrine of laches to decline to apply the statute by analogy. The approach in KM v HM and the obiter dicta in Williams v Minister, Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 suggesting such a broader discretion are not to be followed in NSW. The distinction between laches and the analogous application of limitation statutes is one of substance.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 80 later cases that cite this judgment.
8 of the 80 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.