|Mohareb v Palmer (NSWCA) - perjury - defamation - refusal of leave to prosecute respondent for perjury - leave to appeal refused
|Charan v Commonwealth Bank of Australia (NSWCA) - loans and mortgages - possession - bankruptcy - proceedings against bank not tenable - leave to appeal against dismissal of statements of claim refused
|Arora Supermarkets Pty Ltd v Franklins Pty Ltd (NSWSC) - landlord and tenant - option for renewal of sublease - order refused requiring defendant to exercise option of renewal of head lease
|Saville v Hallmarc Construction Pty Ltd (VSCA) - security of payments - adjudicator’s determination that appellant was within time when he purported to serve first payment claim void - appeal dismissed
|Zweck v Town of Gawler (SASCFC) - environment and planning - refusal to determine application for development plan consent for division of land - limb of clause of land management agreement invalid - appeal allowed
|Benson v Seven Network (Operations) Ltd (SASC) - costs - interim injunction - claim for breach of confidence - defendant to pay plaintiff’s costs of interim injunction taxed and paid immediately
|Summaries With Link (Five Minute Read)
|Mohareb v Palmer  NSWCA 369
Court of Appeal of New South Wales
Meagher JA; Bergin CJ in Eq
Perjury - defamation - applicant sought leave to appeal from refusal of leave pursuant to s338(1)(c) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) to prosecute respondent for perjury - primary judge had dismissed proceedings on basis of failure to identify with precision false statement allegedly made on oath in connection with proceedings - elements of offence of perjury - s327 - held: primary judge did not err in dismissing application in absence of clear identification of perjury charge - proposed appeal had no reasonable prospects of success - leave to appeal refused.
|Charan v Commonwealth Bank of Australia  NSWCA 364
Court of Appeal of New South Wales
Basten JA & Tobias AJA
Loans and mortgages - bankruptcy - possession - first applicant made claims for compensation against bank and trustees in bankruptcy - first applicant also made a claim, which was abandoned, for return of properties of which bank had obtained possession - White J dismissed proceedings without prejudice to right to claim account or equitable damages against bank in relation to its conduct as mortgagee, its power of sale, or net proceeds of sale - present proceedings were commenced in Equity division - primary judge dismissed statements of claim - applicant sought leave to appeal - s116 Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) - ss9 & 420A Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) - s90 Real Property Act 1900 (NSW) - held: proceedings before primary judge not tenable - no error in disposal of proceeedings - application for leave to appeal dismissed.
|Arora Supermarkets Pty Ltd v Franklins Pty Ltd  NSWSC 1766
Supreme Court of New South Wales
Landlord and tenant - plaintiff operated supermarket it occupied under sublease defendant - plaintiff claimed it had exercised option for renewal of sublease and sought order requiring defendant to exercise option of renewal of head lease - under sublease exercise of option only effective if defendant exercised option to renew head lease - whether defendant estopped from relying on discretion in clause of sublease - whether defendant engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct in contravention of s18 of Australian Consumer Law and mandatory injunction should be granted - whether unconscionable conduct engaged in contravention of Australian Consumer Law - held: plaintiffs’ arguments rejected - Court would reach same conclusion if plaintiff’s claim was for mandatory interlocutory injunction - application for relief sought refused.
|Saville v Hallmarc Construction Pty Ltd  VSCA 318
Court of Appeal of Victoria
Warren CJ; Kaye & Tate JJA
Security of payments - judicial review of adjudication determination under Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2002 (VSCA) - whether appellant was out of time when he purported to serve first payment claim - whether primary judge was correct to hold adjudicator’s determination that appellant was within time was void - scope of reviewability of decision by adjudicator - held: fixing of reference date by adjudicator was reviewable - no error in primary judge’s conclusion that reference date fixed by adjudicator was wrong and therefore adjudicator ought not to have assumed jurisdiction - no error in finding adjudication determination was of no legal effect - primary judge’s reasons were adequate - appeal dismissed.
|Zweck v Town of Gawler  SASCFC 172
Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia
Kourakis CJ; Blue & Nicholson JJ
Environment and planning - appellant appealed against Environment, Resources and Development Court’s dismissal of his appeal against Corporation of the Town of Gawler’s refusal to determine application for development plan consent for land division - land was subject of a land management agreement under s57 Development Act 1993 (SA) which contained clause precluding division of land or any application for development authorisation to divide it - held: Environment Court had power to determine validity of clause and no discretion to decline to determine question - second limb of clause which prevent lodgement of application for development authorisation was invalid - first limb, which precluded division related to “development of land” was valid - proposed development was not hypothetical such that Environment Court was entitled to refuse to consider it - appeal allowed - application remitted to Development Assessment Panel for determination.
|Benson v Seven Network (Operations) Ltd  SASC 185
Supreme Court of South Australia
Costs - Court granted plaintiff interim injunction restraining defendant from broadcasting video or audio of plaintiff relevant to subject matter - plaintiff sought costs of interim injunction - defendant submitted costs of application should be costs in the cause - rr263(1), 263(2) & 265 Supreme Court Civil Rules 2006 (SA) - s40(1) Supreme Court Act 1935 (SA) - r101.01 Supreme Court Rules 1987 (SA.)- held: Court doubted matter would proceed to trial - plaintiff had established that balance of convenience favoured grant of relief - plaintiff had strong case for breach of confidence - Court satisfied that exercise of its discretion and justice of case warranted an order that plaintiff have her costs - defendant to pay plaintiff’s costs, taxed and paid immediately.