Dunstan v Higham (No 2)

[2016] ACTCA 28

ACT Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Setting aside judgments
3. › Order not reflecting court's intention
4. › Whether applicant demonstrated discrepancy between court's intention and orders made
5. › Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT), r 1613(2)(d)
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Setting aside judgments
3. › Slip rule
4. › Whether slip rule available to set aside entire judgment on merits
5. › Whether power must be exercised with caution
6. › Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT), r 6906
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Setting aside judgments
3. › Re-agitation of decided issues
4. › Whether application constituted impermissible attempt to re-argue merits

Quick Take

Rule 1613(2)(d) of the Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT) requires a demonstrated discrepancy between the court's actual intention and the orders made; a party's perception that the court understood submissions but failed to reflect that understanding in the judgment does not satisfy this requirement. The slip rule (r 6906) cannot be used to set aside an entire judgment on the basis that it is wrong; it is confined to accidental mistakes or omissions and must be exercised with caution.