Amos v Wiltshire

[2016] QCA 77

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Judgments and Orders
3. › Setting aside judgments and orders
4. › Discovery of fresh facts after order made
5. › Whether facts discovered would have entitled applicant to order in their favour
6. › Whether reasonable diligence exercised to discover evidence
7. › Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), r 668(1)(b)
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Judgments and Orders
3. › Setting aside judgments and orders
4. › Finality of litigation
5. › Whether extensive litigation history militated against granting further opportunity to challenge final orders
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Costs
3. › Indemnity costs
4. › Whether exceptional circumstances warranted indemnity costs order
5. › Applications lacking reasonable basis premised on evidence found to lack credibility

Quick Take

The principles from IVI Pty Ltd v Baycrown Pty Ltd and Wollongong Corporation v Cowan governing fresh evidence applications under r 668(1)(b) UCPR were applied. Evidence that is equivocal and qualified, and that was discoverable on the applicant's own files through reasonable diligence, will not satisfy the fresh evidence test. An extensive history of abandoned applications and litigation abuse will militate strongly against the exercise of discretion to grant further adjournments or opportunities to challenge final orders.