JURISDICTION — plaintiff brings proceedings described in the statement of claim as being for “debt recovery” but in fact seeking a long and complex series of declarations as to resulting or constructive trusts, equitable compensation (Barnes v Addy) and relief under ss 197 and 237 Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) as well as damages under Pt V Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), ss 236 and 243 Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) and/or s 68 or 72 Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW) — plaintiff brings application for summary dismissal as an abuse of process or alternatively a stay consistent with orders made in two other proceedings commenced in the District Court — jurisdiction of District Court in relation to claims for equitable relief (s 134 District Court Act 1973 (NSW)) and as restricted by s 44 District Court Act — whether claims for equitable relief and/or misleading or deceptive conduct would have been assigned to the Common Law Division of the Supreme Court — extent of District Court’s jurisdiction to hear claims for equitable relief — all claims except the Fair Trading Act claim likely to have been assigned to the Equity or Commercial Division of the Supreme Court and thus outside the jurisdiction of the District Court — claim under the Fair Trading Act hopelessly pleaded — statements relied upon inadequately particularised or arose outside the limitation period — claims brought in other courts on similar subject matter stayed, struck out or unsuccessful — undesirability of claims in different jurisdictions in relation to similar subject matter — Fair Trading Act claim struck out under UCPR rr 13.4 and 14.28 — alternative finding that claim should be stayed consistent with orders made in other District Court proceedings
