LFDB v Sm (No 9)

[2026] FCA 1118

Federal Court of Australia

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

1. Practice and Procedure
1. application for a declaration that registration of a New Zealand judgment under the Trans-Tasman Proceedings Act 2010 (Cth) is a nullity, or alternatively, should be set aside
1. where grounds relied on are precluded from being raised by principles of res judicata, issue estoppel and Anshun estoppel
1. where some grounds challenge orders made in other proceedings not before present

Where a prior application to set aside a registered New Zealand judgment under s 72 of the Trans-Tasman Proceedings Act 2010 (Cth) has been dismissed at first instance and on appeal, the dismissal necessarily establishes the continuing validity of the registration, precluding a subsequent application to declare the registration a nullity by operation of cause of action estoppel and issue estoppel.
An Anshun estoppel precludes raising in subsequent proceedings contentions that were so connected to the subject matter of earlier proceedings as to make it unreasonable not to have raised them at that time; a claim that registration documents were unavailable fails where the transcript of the earlier hearing shows those very documents were tendered by the party's own counsel.
Recharacterising a challenge to a registration from a 'set aside' application to a 'nullity' declaration does not avoid preclusive doctrines where the substance of the controversy — the legal effectiveness of the registration — is the same.