Event and Time
Event Description
On 25 October 2019, Mr. Sanossian received judgment from the District Court presided by Russell SC DCJ against his claim of negligence for damages against Parisi & Associates Pty Ltd, the solicitors who represented him in family provision proceedings. The plaintiff's attempts to appeal the judgment within the District Court were dismissed multiple times, with the court advising him to pursue a formal appeal in the Court of Appeal.
Application and Claims
- Plaintiff's Claims: Mr. Sanossian sought to appeal against the District Court's judgment claiming negligence resulting in losses of $720,000.
- Defendant's Position: The defendant, through various motions, contended that the plaintiff's appeal was incompetent and irregular, asserting the need for appeals to be made to the Court of Appeal as per the Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW).
Judicial Decisions
1. The proceedings are removed to the Court of Appeal under s 51(1)(b) of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW). 2. The first defendant's notice of motion for dismissal of the case was dismissed. 3. Each party to bear their own costs related to the first defendant's notice of motion. 4. The proceedings were listed for directions before the Registrar of the Court of Appeal on 19 May 2021.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
- Plaintiff's Arguments:
- The judgment was delivered irregularly. - Did not understand the procedural requirements for a proper appeal. - Continuously sought to set aside the judgment through motions in the District Court.
- Defendant's Arguments:
- The appeal was filed incorrectly, invoking Pt 50 (Common Law Division) when it needed to be done under Pt 51 (Court of Appeal). - The appeal was filed out of time with no request for an extension. - Stated that Mr. Sanossian was repeatedly advised to pursue the appeal in the correct court.