New South Wales Supreme Court

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "New South Wales Supreme Court"

Transcription

1 New South Wales Supreme Court [Index] [Search] [Download] [Help] Alsco Linen Pty Ltd v Cox; The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints & Anor v Rahme & Anor [2003] NSWSC 550 (24 June 2003) Last Updated: 24 June 2003 NEW SOUTH WALES SUPREME COURT CITATION: Alsco Linen Pty Ltd v Cox; The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints & Anor v Rahme & Anor [2003] NSWSC 550 CURRENT JURISDICTION: Common Law FILE NUMBER(S): 13346/02; 13347/02 HEARING DATE{S): 26 May 2003 JUDGMENT DATE: 24/06/2003 PARTIES: Alsco Linen Pty Limited & Anor v Cox; The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints & Anor v Rahme & Anor JUDGMENT OF: Michael Grove J LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: Local Court LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): /01; /01 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Magistrate H. Dillon COUNSEL: S. Rares SC with D. Studdy (Plaintiffs) J. Hilton SC with K. Manion (Defendants) SOLICITORS: Barrie Fudge & Co (Plaintiffs) Smith Partners (Defendants) CATCHWORDS: LOCAL COURT APPEAL QUESTIONS OF LAW RECOGNIZED PRINCIPLES APPLICABLE TO PROCEDURE TO CHALLENGE RETAINER 1 of 7 7/22/03 1:55 PM

2 OF SOLICITOR STATUTORY LIMIT TO APPELLATE INTERVENTION ABSENCE OF ERROR IN POINT OF LAW RELEVANT TO DECISION ACTS CITED: Local Courts (Civil Claims) Act 1970 DECISION: SUMMONS DISMISSED JUDGMENT: IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION MICHAEL GROVE J Tuesday 24 June /02 THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER DAY SAINTS & ANOR v RAHME & ANOR 13346/02 ALSCO LINEN PTY LIMITED & ANOR v COX JUDGMENT 1 HIS HONOUR: These two matters raise identical questions and it was agreed by the parties that the issues would be argued in the context of the summons in which the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is first plaintiff. Judgment in the same terms can therefore be given in both cases. 2 The litigation represents a further chapter in disputes between insurers about the recovery of the cost of replacement car hire whilst vehicles, damaged in collisions, are repaired. Ignoring some technical precision, the claims have frequently been referred to as demurrage. On 5 March 1999 NRMA Insurance Ltd (NRMA) entered a continuous motoring services agreement with Hertz Australia Pty Limited (Hertz) whereby an insured under a particular NRMA policy, not at fault, was provided with a car from a dedicated fleet maintained by Hertz. While repairs were being undertaken, the substitute vehicle was supplied for up to fourteen days at no cost to the insured (or something similar at a preferential rate if the insured was at fault). The insured entered into a hire agreement directly with Hertz but NRMA was billed for the first fourteen days rental. 3 The outcomes of earlier curial contests can be studied and the judgments reveal considerable background, all of which need not be recited for present purposes. See Athanasopoulos & Ors v Moseley & Ors NSWLR 262; Australian Associated Motor Insurers Ltd (AAMI) v NRMA & Anor [2002] FCA It might be noted that in Athanasopoulos, at the first instance court the right of subrogation 2 of 7 7/22/03 1:55 PM

3 whereby NRMA had brought action in the name of its insured was outside of the scope of the issues. There was said to be no effective pleading. The appellate court endorsed this view, observing that the courtesy car program was not part of the cover provided by the insurance policy. The cost of hire of a vehicle was also specifically general exclusion 2 in the policy relevant to the current proceedings, a copy of which is exhibited to the affidavit of Mr Fudge sworn 7 February In part contrast however, in the current proceedings there is express pleading raising the issue of subrogation insofar as it is alleged that the action has been instituted in the name of the insured by a solicitor on the instructions of the insurer (NRMA). It is common ground that a retainer agreement between the insured and the solicitor postdated the commencement of action. Issues were posed as to the efficacy of purported ratification of previous steps and the procedure to challenge retainer. 6 A form of such a retainer agreement is, I note in passing, recited in the judgment in AAMI. There is also an observation that since November 2001 a replacement policy issued by NRMA has provided for optional cover for the cost of hiring a vehicle. This is affirmed in the present case in the affidavit of Bronwyn Smith sworn 7 May In Athanasopoulos, with the endorsement of Handley and Beazley JJA, Ipp JA reiterated his remarks in Woodside Petroleum Development Pty Limited v H& R-D & W Pty Limited WAR 387: Although no allegation as to the right of subrogation has to be made in the statement of claim, the defendant may raise the absence or inadequacy of that right in its defence; it is then for the insurer to justify its right to proceed in the name of the assured. 8 The challenge to subrogation in the present case, in the sense that it is alleged that action has been brought in the name of the insured at the instigation of the insurer, was sought to be advanced by requirements that in answer to subpoenae served upon NRMA and the solicitor on record for its insured, there be produced certain documents including retainer agreements. 9 On 17 October 2002 in five proceedings before the Local Court including the two matters now before this Court, subpoenae were called upon and documents in respect of which there was no controversy were produced and made available for inspection. As to a balance of documents sought, production was resisted. For reasons delivered on 15 November 2002 the learned magistrate set aside the subpoenae. He was, of course, effectively dealing with the balance following production of uncontroversial material. In a written submission counsel summarized the outcome as a determination that the subpoenae were a fishing expedition insofar as they sought the retainer agreements because the retainer of the solicitors had not been challenged and, obiter, that if there was error in that regard, the retainer agreements did not attract legal professional privilege. 10 At the commencement of the hearing in this Court, it was stated by counsel that it was agreed that the appeal was limited to the issue concerning the retainer agreements. The summons also sought relief otherwise than strictly by way of appeal. 11 An appeal to this Court is restricted by s69 of the Local Courts (Civil Claims) Act 1970 namely: 69. Appeal (1) Subject to subsection (2), all judgments and orders of a court exercising jurisdiction under this Act shall be final and conclusive. 3 of 7 7/22/03 1:55 PM

4 (2) A party to proceedings under this Act who is dissatisfied with the judgment or order of the court as being erroneous in point of law, may appeal to the Supreme Court therefrom. (2A) However, in the case of proceedings in the Small Claims Division of a court, an appeal under subsection (2) lies only on the ground of lack of jurisdiction or denial of natural justice. 12 A further subsection (2B) has since been legislated but it is common ground that that provision does not operate in respect of the current cases. 13 It is convenient to note at this point that throughout the learned magistrate s reasons there is reference to AAMI as the insurer of the vehicle involved in a collision with a vehicle insured by NRMA. In AAMI Conti J recorded that there had been a very large number of proceedings in the Local Court between NRMA insured and AAMI insured. It is agreed that the magistrate s reference was erroneous and that the relevant insurers in these cases were NRMA and American Home Assurance Co (AHA). Including the two matters now before the Court, NRMA and AHA are protagonists in five actions in which the total amount claimed is $1, A sixth action was identified of which the amount in issue was not stated but it was not suggested that the amount was substantial. In neither present matter does the claim exceed $ Each proceeding was brought in the Small Claims Division of the Local Court. There is no mention in the documentation provided in support of or resistance to the summons of transfer of either matter into the General Division, however later enquiry of counsel led to a statement that both parties accept that they were in that division at all material times for the purposes of the appeals. I have taken appeals to include other relief sought in the summons. 15 So far as the material before this Court shows, the litigation has not progressed beyond the orders by the magistrate setting aside the subpoenae. This has not inhibited the legal representatives of the parties from seeking to explore a wide range of issues said to be demonstrative of or not demonstrative of, error. 16 The jurisdiction of this Court to intervene is expressly limited to occasion when the judgment or order of the Local Court is erroneous in point of law. It is not a jurisdiction to review any observation concerning the law which happens to be made by the magistrate in the course of his published reasons. The recent amendment to the statute inserting s69(2b) making particular provision in relation to, inter alia, interlocutory orders suggests that, prior to amendment, an order such as made in the current case even if classified as interlocutory would be vulnerable under s69(2). Neither party contended that the order setting aside the subpoenae should be classified as interlocutory and I am content to approach the matters on that basis. 17 Although the learned magistrate extensively dealt with detailed submissions made to him, the reason for order was comprehensively stated thus: Here, it seems to me, there has been a certain amount of shadow-boxing by the parties over the solicitors retainer, but until the retainer is finally challenged, perhaps at the trial of these matters, I cannot see how the retainer document is relevant to the proceedings. On the contrary, from what I have heard so far, the AAMI (sic) insured are seeking the retainer in order to determine whether or on what grounds it could be challenged. In my opinion, that is nothing but a fishing expedition and the subpoenae ought be set aside in respect of the retainer agreements and any documents which would be relevant only to that issue. 18 There was no challenge in the Local Court by way of notice of motion or discrete application. It is not entirely clear what was intended by the qualification perhaps at the trial of these matters but previous reference clearly shows that he was holding that there was not a challenge to retainer justiciable in the proceedings currently before him. 4 of 7 7/22/03 1:55 PM

5 19 The essential question therefore arises as to whether that conclusion was erroneous in law. The circumstance that the ruling might be categorized as procedural does not avoid the operation of s69(2). 20 NRMA submits that it is an established principle that any challenge to a retainer must be undertaken by a substantive application (for example by way of notice of motion) and not merely by way of defence. 21 In England, as long ago as 1914 Warrington J ruled: But the real question is the authority of the solicitor. Is that a question which can be raised as a relevant issue in the action and at the trial? No authority has been cited in support of the affirmative of such a proposition, and, in my opinion, it is impossible, according to the ordinary practice and procedure of the Court, to justify that proposition. The business of this Court could not be carried on if one were not entitled to assume the authority of the solicitor unless and until that authority has been disputed and shown not to exist in the proper form of proceeding, namely, a substantive application on the part of the parties concerned to stay the proceedings on the ground of want of authority. Richmond v Branson & Son Ch Conti J in AAMI referred to this as long established authority. Young J has observed to similar effect: One of the defences is that the first plaintiff did not authorise the commencement of these proceedings. I indicated that I did not consider that that was a proper defence, but that if that matter were pressed, it should be raised by motion to challenge the retainer. The motion was then filed, and I indicated I would hear it on 5 June A W & L M Forrest Pty Ltd v Beamish & Ors FLR It was submitted by AHA that there had been a clear challenge to NRMA s retainer and this was done ore tenus by counsel in these terms: So in answer to the allegation that retainer is not in issue, true it is that there is no motion presently before the Court that says you are not entitled to bring these proceedings. But it is the corollary or the flip side of the defence of subrogation that has been pleaded. (Transcript 17 Oct 14). 24 Reference was made to Australian Workers Union v Bowen CLR 575. The essential issue in that case was the validity of a bankruptcy notice authorized by only some of judgment creditors which was issued by a solicitor whose retainer did not extend beyond a suit out of which a debt for costs had arisen. The case was referred to as an example of a challenge to retainer being dealt with in the absence of a separate substantive motion. Rich J observed: No doubt substantive applications might have been made to test the validity of the bankruptcy notice and the adequacy of the solicitor s retainer to issue it but the objections to both these matters in these respects were discussed at the hearing and satisfactorily disposed of by observations from the bench. 25 However, Dixon J also observed: As the authority of the solicitor who obtained it was in question, it would seem that an independent application would have been the more regular way of attacking it: see Banco de Bilbao v Sancha (1938) 2 KB 192 to which Williams J referred in this Court. But in the Federal Bankruptcy Court that question was gone into upon the hearing of the petition without objection... p of 7 7/22/03 1:55 PM

6 26 And Williams J wrote: The proper procedure for a defendant who wishes to challenge the retainer of the solicitor for the plaintiff is to file a substantive motion and not to raise the want of authority by way of defence to the proceedings Richmond v Branson & Son (1914) 1 Ch 968; Russian Commercial and Industrial Bank v Comptoir d Escompte de Mulhouse(1925) AC p 130; Banco de Bilbao v Sancha (1938) 2 KB at p 192. I think that the issue of a bankruptcy notice which is a process of the Court comes within the principle of these cases and that the respondent should have raised the question in this manner. But it was held in John Shaw & Sons (Salford) Ltd v Shaw (1935) 2 KB 113 that the Court has inherent jurisdiction to stay or strike out the proceedings at whatever stage the facts establish want of capacity or authority to sue. In the instant case no objection was taken to the procedure. If it had been taken, the petition could have been stood over to enable the respondent to launch a substantive application. It is now too late to take the objection As the above extracted submission to the magistrate by counsel then appearing for AHA clearly acknowledges, there was an express objection to the absence of proper procedure by the opponent in this case which had submitted, as stated, that retainer is not in issue. 28 The learned magistrate did not err in point of law in holding that challenge to retainer was required to be independently made where an objection had been taken. 29 I would not understand the dictum of Ipp J in Woodside Petroleum that the insurer must justify its right to proceed in the name of the insured to intend departure from the long established procedural principle of separate substantive challenge to retainer articulated by Warrington J, applied by Conti and Young JJ and approved by three members of the High Court Bench in terms of the extracts which I have cited. 30 It follows therefore that the magistrate did not err in law in ruling that the retainer agreement was irrelevant to any issue then before him. It was not relevant therefore to produce retainer documents for examination and no error is revealed in classifying the attempt to have them produced as fishing. 31 I am conscious that it has been said that the parties wish the merits of the matter to be determined and do not want any procedural irregularities to stand in the way but I decline to exceed the jurisdiction to determine whether the orders made in the Local Court were erroneous in law. Consent of the parties cannot provide a foundation for circumventing the plain intention of the legislation. 32 It is also inappropriate to expatiate upon the alternative argument as to privilege upon which views were expressed in the Local Court or on the existence or absence of legitimate forensic purpose if the issue of retainer had been properly put before the Court. 33 That what is sought is an advisory opinion can be demonstrated by reference to one matter of contradictory submission by the parties. In Cook v Pasminco Ltd (No 2) 2001 ATPR 41/800 Lindgren J had concluded that, at least as general law no legal professional privilege attaches to a costs agreement. However in Re Global Imaging Management (In Liq) [2001] NSWSC 476, Santow J, referring to the Evidence Act, held that a funding agreement may be privileged where it reveals the confidential circumstances of the availability of legal advice and throws oblique light on circumstances to which advice is directed. In the current cases, the Local Court has not even reached a point of being asked to consider circumstances and any opinion now expressed would be not only hypothetical but dependent upon findings not yet, and which may or may not in the future be, made. 34 It is the litigant s decision whether to seek to undertake what Williams J in particular 6 of 7 7/22/03 1:55 PM

7 prescribed as the proper procedure. 35 The appeal being governed by s69(2) of the Local Courts (Civil Claims) Act must fail. 36 The balance of the prayers in the summons can be dealt with compendiously. They are sought to be supported by four propositions: in short, that the insured paid nothing for the cars and therefore suffered no loss; that NRMA has no right of subrogation; that there was no cause of action for the insured to assign to NRMA and, in any event, a cause of action in tort is incapable of assignment. 37 I express no view on the validity of any of these propositions beyond the observation that that, insofar as this Court is invited to assume or determine them, it is implied that they are issues in the dispute between the parties. There has been no hearing or determination of these matters in the Local Court the decision of which, unless erroneous in law, is declared by statute to be final and conclusive. Acceptance of the invitation to deal with these matters would be inconsistent with the statutory limitation. 38 The cases, so far as I can gauge, are part heard in the Local Court and there is no reason shown for this Court to inhibit the progress of the hearings to conclusion. I decline to grant the relief sought in paragraphs 5, 6 and 7 of the Amended Summons. 39 Each summons is dismissed. The plaintiffs are to pay the defendants costs, the costs of the third defendant being those appropriate to a submitting defendant. ********** LAST UPDATED: 24/06/ of 7 7/22/03 1:55 PM

NSW COURT OF APPEAL DECISION SUPPORTS LITIGATION FUNDING MARKET

NSW COURT OF APPEAL DECISION SUPPORTS LITIGATION FUNDING MARKET NSW COURT OF APPEAL DECISION SUPPORTS LITIGATION FUNDING MARKET Introduction 1. The New South Wales Court of Appeal, in a unanimous Judgment on Thursday 31 March 2005, sent some clear messages to legal

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Between: And Toor v. Harding, 2013 BCSC 1202 Amrit Toor and Intech Engineering Ltd. Date: 20130705 Docket: S125365 Registry: Vancouver Plaintiffs Thomas

More information

2015 IL App (1st) 143589-U. No. 1-14-3589 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

2015 IL App (1st) 143589-U. No. 1-14-3589 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT 2015 IL App (1st) 143589-U SIXTH DIVISION September 11, 2015 No. 1-14-3589 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited

More information

FAMILY LAW AMENDMENT (ARBITRATION AND OTHER MEASURES) RULES 2015 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT. Explanatory Statement to F2015L02119

FAMILY LAW AMENDMENT (ARBITRATION AND OTHER MEASURES) RULES 2015 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT. Explanatory Statement to F2015L02119 FAMILY LAW AMENDMENT (ARBITRATION AND OTHER MEASURES) RULES 2015 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT 1 Table of Contents 1. GENERAL OUTLINE 4 Schedule 1 Amendments relating to arbitration 4 Schedule 2 Amendments relating

More information

Andrew Thurlow & Suzanne Innocenzi v The Architect Studio Pty Ltd [2008] NTMC 005 THE ARCHITECT STUDIO PTY LTD

Andrew Thurlow & Suzanne Innocenzi v The Architect Studio Pty Ltd [2008] NTMC 005 THE ARCHITECT STUDIO PTY LTD CITATION: PARTIES: Andrew Thurlow & Suzanne Innocenzi v The Architect Studio Pty Ltd [2008] NTMC 005 ANDREW THURLOW SUZANNE INNOCENZI v THE ARCHITECT STUDIO PTY LTD TITLE OF COURT: JURISDICTION: Local

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Merlo v. Canada (Attorney General), 2013 BCSC 1136 Date: 20130625 Docket: S122255 Registry: Vancouver Between: Brought under the Class Proceedings Act,

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Webber v. Boutilier, 2016 NSSC 5

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Webber v. Boutilier, 2016 NSSC 5 SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Webber v. Boutilier, 2016 NSSC 5 Date: 20160105 Docket: Hfx No. 241129 Registry: Halifax Between: Cindy June Webber v. Plaintiff Arthur Boutilier and Dartmouth Central

More information

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT Not Reportable Case No: 20794/2014 In the matter between: ESTEE BUNTON PIETER BUNTON FIRST APPELLANT SECOND APPELLANT and W A COETZEE AUTO & GENERAL

More information

Supreme Court Civil Supplementary Rules 2014

Supreme Court Civil Supplementary Rules 2014 South Australia Supreme Court Civil Supplementary Rules 2014 SCHEDULE 3 APPROVED FORMS Schedule 3 Approved Forms relate to Supreme Court Civil Supplementary Rules 2014, dated 2nd September 2014, that came

More information

2015 IL App (1st) 141310-U. No. 1-14-1310 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

2015 IL App (1st) 141310-U. No. 1-14-1310 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT 2015 IL App (1st) 141310-U FIRST DIVISION October 5, 2015 No. 1-14-1310 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances

More information

ILLINOIS OFFICIAL REPORTS

ILLINOIS OFFICIAL REPORTS ILLINOIS OFFICIAL REPORTS Appellate Court Hart v. Kieu Le, 2013 IL App (2d) 121380 Appellate Court Caption LYNETTE Y. HART, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LOAN KIEU LE, Defendant-Appellee. District & No. Second

More information

Compliance With Pre-Court Procedures - The Workers Compensation Rehabilitation Act 2003 Post Berowra Holdings

Compliance With Pre-Court Procedures - The Workers Compensation Rehabilitation Act 2003 Post Berowra Holdings I N S U R A N C E C A S E N O T E Compliance With Pre-Court Procedures - The Workers Compensation Rehabilitation Act 2003 Post Berowra Holdings The introduction of the pre-court procedures under the Workers

More information

Nitschke v Medical Board of Australia (No 2) [2015] NTSC 50

Nitschke v Medical Board of Australia (No 2) [2015] NTSC 50 Nitschke v Medical Board of Australia (No 2) [2015] NTSC 50 PARTIES: NITSCHKE Philip v MEDICAL BOARD OF AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT: JURISDICTION: SUPREME COURT OF THE NORTHERN TERRITORY SUPREME COURT OF

More information

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT ` THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter between: JUDGMENT Not Reportable Case No: 20157/2014 UTi SOUTH AFRICA (PROPRIETARY) LIMITED APPELLANT and TRIPLE OPTION TRADING 29 CC RESPONDENT

More information

Case4:12-cv-03288-KAW Document2-1 Filed06/25/12 Page1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND DIVISION

Case4:12-cv-03288-KAW Document2-1 Filed06/25/12 Page1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND DIVISION Case4:12-cv-03288-KAW Document2-1 Filed06/25/12 Page1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND DIVISION STANDING ORDER FOR MAGISTRATE JUDGE KANDIS A. WESTMORE (Revised

More information

ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597

ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 14, 2015 california legislature 2015 16 regular session ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597 Introduced by Assembly Member Cooley February 24, 2015 An act to amend Sections 36 and 877 of, and

More information

VII. JUDGMENT RULE 54. JUDGMENTS; COSTS

VII. JUDGMENT RULE 54. JUDGMENTS; COSTS VII. JUDGMENT RULE 54. JUDGMENTS; COSTS (a) Definition; Form. Judgment as used in these rules includes a decree and any order from which an appeal lies. A judgment shall not contain a recital of pleadings

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO. (Commercial Division) NEDBANK LESOTHO LIMITED. TSELISO CLOVIS MANYELI t/a COPY SHOP JUDGMENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO. (Commercial Division) NEDBANK LESOTHO LIMITED. TSELISO CLOVIS MANYELI t/a COPY SHOP JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO (Commercial Division) CCT/42/2010 In the matter between:- NEDBANK LESOTHO LIMITED APPLICANT And TSELISO CLOVIS MANYELI t/a COPY SHOP RESPONDENT JUDGMENT Coram : Honourable

More information

Inquiry into Debt Recovery in New South Wales

Inquiry into Debt Recovery in New South Wales THE LAW SOCIETY OF NEW SOUTH WALES Our ref: Iit.law:RElw 16 May 2014 Mr Bryan Doyle Committee Chair Legislative Assembly Committee on Legal Affairs Parliament of New South Wales Macquarie Street SYDNEY

More information

Illinois Official Reports

Illinois Official Reports Illinois Official Reports Appellate Court BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP v. Pieczonka, 2015 IL App (1st) 133128 Appellate Court Caption BAC HOME LOANS SERVICING, LP, f/k/a Countrywide Home Loans Servicing,

More information

The Court of Protection Rules 2007

The Court of Protection Rules 2007 STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS 2007 No. 1744 (L. 12) MENTAL CAPACITY, ENGLAND AND WALES The Court of Protection Rules 2007 Made - - - - - 25th June 2007 Laid before Parliament 4th July 2007 Coming into force -

More information

WELLINGTON CITY COUNCIL Appellant. COLIN JAMES DALLAS Respondent. French, Winkelmann and Asher JJ

WELLINGTON CITY COUNCIL Appellant. COLIN JAMES DALLAS Respondent. French, Winkelmann and Asher JJ IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA148/2014 [2015] NZCA 126 BETWEEN AND WELLINGTON CITY COUNCIL Appellant COLIN JAMES DALLAS Respondent Court: Counsel: French, Winkelmann and Asher JJ D J Heaney QC

More information

Claims Against Public Officials. Introduction. Negligence inconsistent duties of public officials. Client Newsletter

Claims Against Public Officials. Introduction. Negligence inconsistent duties of public officials. Client Newsletter Litigation Client Newsletter Claims Against Public Officials Recent Significant Cases February 2008 Introduction This newsletter throws a spotlight on negligence claims against the police and raises the

More information

ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597

ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597 california legislature 2015 16 regular session ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597 Introduced by Assembly Member Cooley February 24, 2015 An act to amend Sections 36 and 877 of, and to add Chapter 6 (commencing with

More information

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA TRIAL DIVISION CIVIL SECTION

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA TRIAL DIVISION CIVIL SECTION IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA TRIAL DIVISION CIVIL SECTION LOUISE FOSTER Administrator of the : AUGUST TERM 2010 Estate of GEORGE FOSTER : and BARBARA DILL : vs.

More information

LAC CASE NO: JA 38/08 SANLAM LIFE INSURANCE LIMITED JUDGMENT. [1] Leave to appeal having been granted by the Labour Court, this is an

LAC CASE NO: JA 38/08 SANLAM LIFE INSURANCE LIMITED JUDGMENT. [1] Leave to appeal having been granted by the Labour Court, this is an IN THE LABOUR APPEAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (HELD AT JOHANNESBURG) LAC CASE NO: JA 38/08 In the matter between SANLAM LIFE INSURANCE LIMITED APPELLANT And THE COMMISSION FOR CONCILIATION, MEDIATION AND

More information

Before : THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE COULSON - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Between : PANTELLI ASSOCIATES LIMITED.

Before : THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE COULSON - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Between : PANTELLI ASSOCIATES LIMITED. Neutral Citation Number: [2010] EWHC 3189 (TCC) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION TECHNOLOGY AND CONSTRUCTION COURT Case No: HT-10-332 Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL

More information

NOVA SCOTIA WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL

NOVA SCOTIA WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL NOVA SCOTIA WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL Applicant: [*] Respondents: [*] et al and The Workers Compensation Board of Nova Scotia SECTION 29 APPLICATION - PRELIMINARY DECISION Representatives:

More information

Court of Appeals of Ohio

Court of Appeals of Ohio [Cite as Hignite v. Glick, Layman & Assoc., Inc., 2011-Ohio-1698.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 95782 DIANNE HIGNITE PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT

More information

APPEAL FROM DECISION OF MEDICAL APPEAL TRIBUNAL ON A QUESTION OF LAW

APPEAL FROM DECISION OF MEDICAL APPEAL TRIBUNAL ON A QUESTION OF LAW 12.2.63 R(l) 9/63 (Scottish case) /Tribunal Decision APPEAL FROM DECISION OF MEDICAL APPEAL TRIBUNAL ON A QUESTION OF LAW Jurisdiction of Medical Appeal lkibonal=ature of deeision where case raises questions

More information

IN THE COURT OF QUEEN S BENCH OF ALBERTA JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF EDMONTON TANYA LABONTE, JESSE STECHYNSKY AND RHONDA MCPHEE. - and

IN THE COURT OF QUEEN S BENCH OF ALBERTA JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF EDMONTON TANYA LABONTE, JESSE STECHYNSKY AND RHONDA MCPHEE. - and IN THE COURT OF QUEEN S BENCH OF ALBERTA JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF EDMONTON Action No. 0403-12898 B E T W E E N : TANYA LABONTE, JESSE STECHYNSKY AND RHONDA MCPHEE Plaintiffs - and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN

More information

STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS

STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS PROVIDENCE, SC. DISTRICT COURT SIXTH DIVISION THOMAS A. PALANGIO D/B/A : CONSUMER AUTO SALES : : v. : A.A. No. 11-093 : DAVID M. SULLIVAN, TAX : ADMINISTRATOR

More information

TEXAS RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

TEXAS RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE TEXAS RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE PART V - RULES OF PRACTICE IN JUSTICE COURTS Adopted by the Supreme Court of Texas Justice Court, Pct 1 1 of 24 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1. GENERAL... 6 RULE 523. DISTRICT

More information

PRE-LEGAL & LEGAL PROCEDURES FOR DEBT RECOVERY (SA)

PRE-LEGAL & LEGAL PROCEDURES FOR DEBT RECOVERY (SA) PRE-LEGAL & LEGAL PROCEDURES FOR DEBT RECOVERY (SA) M A R S H A L L S Solicitors Level 10 111 Gawler Place Adelaide 5000 Telephone: (08) 8213 4000 GPO Box 648 Adelaide 5001 Facsimile: (08) 8213 4099 Email

More information

IN THE MANCHESTER COUNTY COURT No.2QT66034. 1 Bridge Street West Manchester M60 9DJ. Claimant. Defendant

IN THE MANCHESTER COUNTY COURT No.2QT66034. 1 Bridge Street West Manchester M60 9DJ. Claimant. Defendant 1 0 1 0 1 IN THE MANCHESTER COUNTY COURT No.QT0 1 Bridge Street West Manchester M0 DJ 0 th November B e f o r e:- DISTRICT JUDGE MATHARU COMBINED SOLUTIONS UK Ltd. (Trading as Combined Parking Solutions)

More information

ISSUES PAPER LEGAL REPRESENTATION AND JURISDICTIONAL LIMIT IN SMALL CLAIMS

ISSUES PAPER LEGAL REPRESENTATION AND JURISDICTIONAL LIMIT IN SMALL CLAIMS DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND JUSTICE ISSUES PAPER LEGAL REPRESENTATION AND JURISDICTIONAL LIMIT IN SMALL CLAIMS June 2013 Legal Policy Division Department of the Attorney-General and Justice

More information

S.116 Of The Courts of Justice Act Can Defendants Impose A Structured Settlement on the Plaintiff? Robert Roth

S.116 Of The Courts of Justice Act Can Defendants Impose A Structured Settlement on the Plaintiff? Robert Roth S.116 Of The Courts of Justice Act Can Defendants Impose A Structured Settlement on the Plaintiff? Robert Roth Historically, at common law, a plaintiff was not obliged to accept a structured settlement,

More information

Rule 60A - Child and Adult Protection

Rule 60A - Child and Adult Protection Rule 60A - Child and Adult Protection Scope of Rule 60A 60A.01(1) This Rule is divided into four parts and it provides procedure for each of the following: (c) (d) protection of a child, and other purposes,

More information

Case 2:10-cv-02263-JAR Document 98 Filed 05/04/11 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

Case 2:10-cv-02263-JAR Document 98 Filed 05/04/11 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS Case 2:10-cv-02263-JAR Document 98 Filed 05/04/11 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS SANDRA H. DEYA and EDWIN DEYA, individually and as next friends and natural

More information

Pg. 01 French v Carter Lemon Camerons LLP

Pg. 01 French v Carter Lemon Camerons LLP Contents French v Carter Lemon Camerons LLP 1 Excelerate Technology Limited v Cumberbatch and Others 3 Downing v Peterborough and Stamford Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 5 Yeo v Times Newspapers Limited

More information

AT ARUSHA. Taxation Cause No.2 of 2012. (Originating from Appeal No. 1 of 2012) (Appellate Division) PLAXEDA RUGUMBA..

AT ARUSHA. Taxation Cause No.2 of 2012. (Originating from Appeal No. 1 of 2012) (Appellate Division) PLAXEDA RUGUMBA.. IN THE EAST AFRICAN COURT OF JUSTICE AT ARUSHA Taxation Cause No.2 of 2012 (Originating from Appeal No. 1 of 2012) (Appellate Division) PLAXEDA RUGUMBA..APPLICANT VERSUS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE REPUBLIC

More information

COMPANIES LIQUIDATION RULES, 2012

COMPANIES LIQUIDATION RULES, 2012 Arrangement of Rules Rule ORDER 1 9 CITATION, APPLICATION AND COMMENCEMENT 9 Citation (O.1, r.1)...9 Application (O.1, r.2)...9 Commencement and transitional provisions (O.1, r.3)...10 Application of Supreme

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. No. 99,491. KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Appellant, JILL POWELL, Appellee. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. No. 99,491. KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Appellant, JILL POWELL, Appellee. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS No. 99,491 KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Appellant, v. JILL POWELL, Appellee. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT 1. Under the Kansas Act for Judicial Review and Civil Enforcement

More information

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG CASE NO: 13/33469 (1) REPORTABLE: YES / NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO (3) REVISED... DATE...

More information

Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the

Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the ****************************************************** The officially released date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal

More information

MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT CLAIMS ACT

MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT CLAIMS ACT Province of Alberta MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT CLAIMS ACT Revised Statutes of Alberta 2000 Chapter M-22 Current as of April 1, 2015 Office Consolidation Published by Alberta Queen s Printer Alberta Queen s

More information

Illinois Official Reports

Illinois Official Reports Illinois Official Reports Appellate Court CitiMortgage, Inc. v. Bukowski, 2015 IL App (1st) 140780 Appellate Court Caption CITIMORTGAGE, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ANNA BUKOWSKI and KATHERINE D. BUKOWSKI,

More information

Part 15 Experts. (5) Copies of the report shall be forwarded by the clerk to the parties or their solicitors.

Part 15 Experts. (5) Copies of the report shall be forwarded by the clerk to the parties or their solicitors. Alberta Rules of Court 390/68 R218 Part 15 Experts Court expert 218(1) The court, on its own motion or upon the application of any party in any case where independent technical evidence would appear to

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE Filed 9/19/13 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE LAS VEGAS LAND AND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants,

More information

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02-13-00125-CV CHRISTOPHER EDOMWANDE APPELLANT V. JULIO GAZA & SANDRA F. GAZA APPELLEES ---------- FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF TARRANT COUNTY

More information

IDENTIFICATION OF CONTRACTS OF INSURANCE INSTRUMENT 2004

IDENTIFICATION OF CONTRACTS OF INSURANCE INSTRUMENT 2004 FSA 2004/58 IDENTIFICATION OF CONTRACTS OF INSURANCE INSTRUMENT 2004 Powers exercised A. The Financial Services Authority makes this instrument in the exercise of the power in section 157(1) (Guidance)

More information

Mac Attack Equipment Hire Pty Ltd v AJ Lucas Operations Pty Ltd [2011] NTSC 01 PTY LTD

Mac Attack Equipment Hire Pty Ltd v AJ Lucas Operations Pty Ltd [2011] NTSC 01 PTY LTD Mac Attack Equipment Hire Pty Ltd v AJ Lucas Operations Pty Ltd [2011] NTSC 01 PARTIES: MAC ATTACK EQUIPMENT HIRE PTY LTD v AJ LUCAS OPERATIONS PTY LTD TITLE OF COURT: JURISDICTION: SUPREME COURT OF THE

More information

IN THE WORKERS COMPENSATION COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 2015 MTWCC 13. WCC No. 2015-3545 CAR WERKS, LLC. Petitioner. vs. UNINSURED EMPLOYERS FUND

IN THE WORKERS COMPENSATION COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 2015 MTWCC 13. WCC No. 2015-3545 CAR WERKS, LLC. Petitioner. vs. UNINSURED EMPLOYERS FUND IN THE WORKERS COMPENSATION COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 2015 MTWCC 13 WCC No. 2015-3545 CAR WERKS, LLC Petitioner vs. UNINSURED EMPLOYERS FUND Respondent/Third Party Petitioner vs. JAMES E. GAWRONSKI

More information

Chapter 153. Violations and Fines 2013 EDITION. Related Laws Page 571 (2013 Edition)

Chapter 153. Violations and Fines 2013 EDITION. Related Laws Page 571 (2013 Edition) Chapter 153 2013 EDITION Violations and Fines VIOLATIONS (Generally) 153.005 Definitions 153.008 Violations described 153.012 Violation categories 153.015 Unclassified and specific fine violations 153.018

More information

Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals

Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals RENDERED: MAY 8, 2009; 10:00 A.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2007-CA-001800-MR PROGRESSIVE MAX INSURANCE COMPANY APPELLANT APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT v.

More information

2015 IL App (1st) 141985-U. No. 1-14-1985 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

2015 IL App (1st) 141985-U. No. 1-14-1985 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT 2015 IL App (1st) 141985-U No. 1-14-1985 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1).

More information

Sweeping changes to the Administration and Probate Act A new era for family provision claims. Carol McOmish. Barrister, Gordon & Jackson s List

Sweeping changes to the Administration and Probate Act A new era for family provision claims. Carol McOmish. Barrister, Gordon & Jackson s List Sweeping changes to the Administration and Probate Act A new era for family provision claims Carol McOmish Barrister, Gordon & Jackson s List Amendments to the Administration and Probate Act made by the

More information

29 of 41 DOCUMENTS. SAN DIEGO ASSEMBLERS, INC., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. WORK COMP FOR LESS INSURANCE SERVICES, INC., Defendant and Respondent.

29 of 41 DOCUMENTS. SAN DIEGO ASSEMBLERS, INC., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. WORK COMP FOR LESS INSURANCE SERVICES, INC., Defendant and Respondent. Page 1 29 of 41 DOCUMENTS SAN DIEGO ASSEMBLERS, INC., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. WORK COMP FOR LESS INSURANCE SERVICES, INC., Defendant and Respondent. D062406 COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE

More information

THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE COURT OF APPEAL. HCVAP 2012/026 IN THE MATTER of an Interlocutory Appeal and

THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE COURT OF APPEAL. HCVAP 2012/026 IN THE MATTER of an Interlocutory Appeal and THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE COURT OF APPEAL SAINT LUCIA HCVAP 2012/026 IN THE MATTER of an Interlocutory Appeal and IN THE MATTER of Part 62.10 of the Civil Procedure Rules BETWEEN: CHRISTIAN

More information

Law Society of Saskatchewan Queen s Bench Rules of Court webinars Part 1: Overview

Law Society of Saskatchewan Queen s Bench Rules of Court webinars Part 1: Overview Law Society of Saskatchewan Queen s Bench Rules of Court webinars Part 1: Overview Reché McKeague Director of Research, Law Reform Commission of Saskatchewan January 28, 2013 Table of Contents 1. Introduction...

More information

HP0868, LD 1187, item 1, 123rd Maine State Legislature An Act To Recoup Health Care Funds through the Maine False Claims Act

HP0868, LD 1187, item 1, 123rd Maine State Legislature An Act To Recoup Health Care Funds through the Maine False Claims Act PLEASE NOTE: Legislative Information cannot perform research, provide legal advice, or interpret Maine law. For legal assistance, please contact a qualified attorney. Be it enacted by the People of the

More information

Delaware UCCJEA 13 Del. Code 1901 et seq.

Delaware UCCJEA 13 Del. Code 1901 et seq. Delaware UCCJEA 13 Del. Code 1901 et seq. 1901. Short title This chapter may be cited as the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act. 1902. Definitions As used in this chapter: (1) "Abandoned"

More information

PREPARING AFFIDAVITS FOR THE MAGISTRATES COURT. Getting an affidavit right

PREPARING AFFIDAVITS FOR THE MAGISTRATES COURT. Getting an affidavit right PREPARING AFFIDAVITS FOR THE MAGISTRATES COURT Getting an affidavit right Caxton Legal Centre Inc. Copyright Caxton Legal Centre Inc. 1 Manning Street South Brisbane QLD 4101 Telephone: (07) 3214 6333

More information

RULES OF THE TAX APPEAL COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I

RULES OF THE TAX APPEAL COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I RULES OF THE TAX APPEAL COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I (SCRU-13-0005988) Adopted and Promulgated by the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai i As amended March 6, 1981 Effective March 6, 1981 With Further

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA Lombard Insurance Co Ltd v City of Cape Town [2007] JOL 20661 (SCA) Issue Order CASE NO: 441/06 Reportable In the matter between: LOMBARD INSURANCE COMPANY

More information

Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the

Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the ****************************************************** The officially released date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal

More information

TITLE XXIII CLAIMS FOR LITIGATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS

TITLE XXIII CLAIMS FOR LITIGATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS RULE 231 (7/6/12) 153 TITLE XXIII CLAIMS FOR LITIGATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS RULE 230. GENERAL (a) Applicability: The Rules of this Title XXIII set forth the special provisions which apply to claims

More information

AUTOMART LIMITED V. WAQA ROKOTUINASAU - ERCA NO. 9 OF 2012 JUDGMENT

AUTOMART LIMITED V. WAQA ROKOTUINASAU - ERCA NO. 9 OF 2012 JUDGMENT IN THE EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COURT AT SUVA APPELLATE JURISDICTION CASE NUMBER: ERCA NO. 09 OF 2012 BETWEEN: AUTOMART LIMITED APPELLANT AND: WAQA ROKOTUINASAU RESPONDENT Appearances: Ms. Drova for the Appellant.

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS M.R. 3140 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS Order entered February 16, 2011. (Deleted material is struck through and new material is underscored.) Effective immediately, Supreme Court Rules

More information

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas Opinion issued June 11, 2013. In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-12-00636-CV SINHUE TEMPLOS, Appellant V. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Appellee On Appeal from the 333rd District Court

More information

UNREPRESENTED LITIGANTS

UNREPRESENTED LITIGANTS PROCEDURE GUIDE For UNREPRESENTED LITIGANTS FOR GENERAL CIVIL CLAIMS IN THE CIVIL JURISDICTION OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA Last updated: 17 May 2012 DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA 500

More information

Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the

Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the ****************************************************** The officially released date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal

More information

ARBITRATION ACT 42 OF 1965

ARBITRATION ACT 42 OF 1965 ARBITRATION ACT 42 OF 1965 [ASSENTED TO 5 APRIL 1965] [DATE OF COMMENCEMENT: 14 APRIL 1965] (English text signed by the State President) as amended by Justice Laws Rationalisation Act 18 of 1996 General

More information

ESTATE OF JOHN JENNINGS. WILLIAM CUMMING et al. entered in the Superior Court (Waldo County, R. Murray, J.) finding George liable

ESTATE OF JOHN JENNINGS. WILLIAM CUMMING et al. entered in the Superior Court (Waldo County, R. Murray, J.) finding George liable MAINE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT Decision: 2013 ME 103 Docket: Wal-13-175 Argued: October 7, 2013 Decided: November 26, 2013 Reporter of Decisions Panel: SAUFLEY, C.J., and ALEXANDER, LEVY, SILVER, MEAD, GORMAN

More information

NO. COA12-1176 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 2 April 2013

NO. COA12-1176 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 2 April 2013 NO. COA12-1176 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 2 April 2013 BOBBY ANGLIN, Plaintiff, v. Mecklenburg County No. 12 CVS 1143 DUNBAR ARMORED, INC. AND GALLAGER BASSETT SERVICES, INC., Defendants. Liens

More information

--- Magistrate B R Wright. Melbourne REASONS FOR DECISION ---

--- Magistrate B R Wright. Melbourne REASONS FOR DECISION --- !Undefined Bookmark, I IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF VICTORIA AT MELBOURNE Case No. D11970768 JOHN SAUNDERS Plaintiff v VICTORIAN WORKCOVER AUTHORITY Defendant --- MAGISTRATE: Magistrate B R Wright WHERE

More information

LAW REFORM (CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE) AMENDMENT BILL 2001

LAW REFORM (CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE) AMENDMENT BILL 2001 1 LAW REFORM (CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE) AMENDMENT BILL 2001 EXPLANATORY NOTES GENERAL OUTLINE OBJECTIVES OF THE LEGISLATION The purpose of this Bill is to address the impact of the decision of the High

More information

CAN A PLEADING BE AMENDED BECAUSE OF A LAWYER S MISTAKE?

CAN A PLEADING BE AMENDED BECAUSE OF A LAWYER S MISTAKE? 1 CAN A PLEADING BE AMENDED BECAUSE OF A LAWYER S MISTAKE? By Bill McNally and Bottom Line Research & Communications 1 A lawyer frequently finds him or herself in the position where he or she has made

More information

SMALL CLAIMS RULES. (d) Record of Proceedings. A record shall be made of all small claims court proceedings.

SMALL CLAIMS RULES. (d) Record of Proceedings. A record shall be made of all small claims court proceedings. SMALL CLAIMS RULES Rule 501. Scope and Purpose (a) How Known and Cited. These rules for the small claims division for the county court are additions to C.R.C.P. and shall be known and cited as the Colorado

More information

FILED December 18, 2015 Carla Bender 4 th District Appellate Court, IL

FILED December 18, 2015 Carla Bender 4 th District Appellate Court, IL NOTICE This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e(1. 2015 IL App (4th 150340-U NO. 4-15-0340

More information

GLOSSARY OF SELECTED LEGAL TERMS

GLOSSARY OF SELECTED LEGAL TERMS GLOSSARY OF SELECTED LEGAL TERMS Sources: US Courts : http://www.uscourts.gov/library/glossary.html New York State Unified Court System: http://www.nycourts.gov/lawlibraries/glossary.shtml Acquittal A

More information

Julie Belt v Basildon & Thurock NHS Trust [2004] ADR L.R. 02/27

Julie Belt v Basildon & Thurock NHS Trust [2004] ADR L.R. 02/27 JUDGMENT : MRS JUSTICE COX: QBD. 27th February 2004 1. The appellant, Julie Belt (hereafter referred to as the claimant ), appeals from the order of His Honour Judge Yelton dated 30 October 2003, setting

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA NORTH WEST HIGH COURT, MAHIKENG

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA NORTH WEST HIGH COURT, MAHIKENG SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA NORTH WEST HIGH

More information

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO In Re: ) ) CHIEF JUDGE RICHARD L. SPEER Paul I. Hickman ) ) Debtor(s) ) ) (Related Case: 00-31579) Paul Hickman ) ) Plaintiff(s) ) ) v.

More information

IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2011] NZEmpC 169 ARC 54/11. THERMOSASH COMMERCIAL LIMITED Defendant

IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2011] NZEmpC 169 ARC 54/11. THERMOSASH COMMERCIAL LIMITED Defendant IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2011] NZEmpC 169 ARC 54/11 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER OF an application to strike out the

More information

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas Opinion issued December 16, 2014 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-14-00351-CV JAMES W. PAULSEN, Appellant / Cross-Appellee v. ELLEN A. YARRELL, Appellee / Cross-Appellant

More information

Court of Petty Sessions (Civil Jurisdiction) (Solicitors' Costs) Regulations

Court of Petty Sessions (Civil Jurisdiction) (Solicitors' Costs) Regulations Regulations 1982 No. 31 1 Court of Petty Sessions (Civil Jurisdiction) (Solicitors' ) Regulations I, PETER DREW DURACK, the Attorney-General of the Commonwealth of Australia, in pursuance of section 8

More information

(1) Conventional filing means a process whereby a filer files a paper document with the court.

(1) Conventional filing means a process whereby a filer files a paper document with the court. CHAPTER 21 Filing and Service by Electronic Means 21.010 DEFINITIONS The following definitions apply to this chapter: (1) Conventional filing means a process whereby a filer files a paper document with

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM RE: ) Supreme Court Case No. PRM 06-006 ) ) QMENDING PROMULGATION ORDER ) PROMULGATION ORDER NO. YO. 06-006-02 ON THE LOCAL RULES 06-006-10 DF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF GUAM )

More information

Advice Note. An overview of civil proceedings in England. Introduction

Advice Note. An overview of civil proceedings in England. Introduction Advice Note An overview of civil proceedings in England Introduction There is no civil code in England; English civil law comprises of essentially legislation by Parliament and decisions by the courts.

More information

Northern Insurance Company of New York v. Resinski

Northern Insurance Company of New York v. Resinski MONTGOMERY COUNTY LAW REPORTER 140-301 2003 MBA 30 Northern Ins. Co. of New York v. Resinski [140 M.C.L.R., Part II Northern Insurance Company of New York v. Resinski APPEAL and ERROR Motion for Summary

More information

JAMAICA THE HON MR JUSTICE MORRISON JA THE HON MR JUSTICE BROOKS JA THE HON MS JUSTICE LAWRENCE-BESWICK JA (AG) BETWEEN GODFREY THOMPSON APPELLANT

JAMAICA THE HON MR JUSTICE MORRISON JA THE HON MR JUSTICE BROOKS JA THE HON MS JUSTICE LAWRENCE-BESWICK JA (AG) BETWEEN GODFREY THOMPSON APPELLANT [2014] JMCA Civ 37 JAMAICA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL SUPREME COURT CIVIL APPEAL NO 41/2007 BEFORE: THE HON MR JUSTICE MORRISON JA THE HON MR JUSTICE BROOKS JA THE HON MS JUSTICE LAWRENCE-BESWICK JA (AG) BETWEEN

More information

Expert Evidence In Professional Negligence Claims

Expert Evidence In Professional Negligence Claims BuildLaw - Issue 13 Expert Evidence In Professional Negligence Claims 1 Expert Evidence In Professional Negligence Claims A recent High Court decision has provided practical guidance on the use of expert

More information

Illinois Official Reports

Illinois Official Reports Illinois Official Reports Appellate Court Pekin Insurance Co. v. Rada Development, LLC, 2014 IL App (1st) 133947 Appellate Court Caption PEKIN INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. RADA DEVELOPMENT,

More information

JURISDICTION OF FEDERAL COURTS. Federal Crown Proceedings. (Remarks by Hon. B. L. Strayer) The Future/Solutions

JURISDICTION OF FEDERAL COURTS. Federal Crown Proceedings. (Remarks by Hon. B. L. Strayer) The Future/Solutions JURISDICTION OF FEDERAL COURTS Federal Crown Proceedings (Remarks by Hon. B. L. Strayer) The Future/Solutions A. Tort (extracontractual civil liability) and Contract Actions by and against the Crown The

More information

Case Name: Sousa v. Akulu. Between Sousa, and Akulu et al. [2006] O.J. No. 3061. 36 C.P.C. (6th) 158. 150 A.C.W.S. (3d) 320. 2006 CarswellOnt 4640

Case Name: Sousa v. Akulu. Between Sousa, and Akulu et al. [2006] O.J. No. 3061. 36 C.P.C. (6th) 158. 150 A.C.W.S. (3d) 320. 2006 CarswellOnt 4640 Page 1 of 5 Case Name: Sousa v. Akulu Between Sousa, and Akulu et al [2006] O.J. No. 3061 36 C.P.C. (6th) 158 150 A.C.W.S. (3d) 320 2006 CarswellOnt 4640 Court File No. 05-CV-282383PD 3 Ontario Superior

More information

STATE OF MINNESOTA IN SUPREME COURT A13-1302. Court of Appeals Anderson, J.

STATE OF MINNESOTA IN SUPREME COURT A13-1302. Court of Appeals Anderson, J. STATE OF MINNESOTA IN SUPREME COURT A13-1302 Court of Appeals Anderson, J. Robert Meeker, et al., Respondents, vs. Filed: April 8, 2015 Office of Appellate Courts IDS Property Casualty Insurance Company,

More information

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE : AL JAZEERA AMERICA, LLC, : : Plaintiff, : : v. : C.A. No. 8823-VCG : AT&T SERVICES, INC., : : Defendant. : : MOTION TO STAY OCTOBER 14, 2013 LETTER OPINION

More information

Supplement No. 3 published with Extraordinary No. 5, dated 22 January, 2009. THE COMPANIES WINDING UP RULES 2008

Supplement No. 3 published with Extraordinary No. 5, dated 22 January, 2009. THE COMPANIES WINDING UP RULES 2008 CAYMAN ISLANDS Supplement No. 3 published with Extraordinary No. 5, dated 22 January, 2009. THE COMPANIES WINDING UP RULES 2008 AJJ/999999/15644034v1 ORDER 1...12 CITATION, APPLICATION AND COMMENCEMENT...12

More information

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 NORMAN McMAHON, v. Appellant INNOVATIVE PAYROLL SERVICES, LLC AND JOHN S. SCHOLTZ, Appellees IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA No. 2384 EDA

More information