The Court of Appeal held that a pleading of equitable defences of laches, delay and acquiescence does not amount to a pleading of a defence under the Limitation Act 1969 (NSW), which must be expressly pleaded pursuant to s 68A and UCPR r 14.14; nor does raising limitation issues in submissions suffice. On the facts, the Court conducted its own assessment of disputed loan advances and repayments under s 75A of the Supreme Court Act, finding the respondent had proved indebtedness exceeding the judgment sum, and accordingly dismissed the appeal notwithstanding the primary judge's erroneous reliance on a figure from submissions that did not represent the net amount claimed.
The full text is available to signed-in members.