Read about cases our floor members have appeared in below:
Bank of China Ltd v Chen (No 2)  NSWSC 1168
A summons was served on the defendant, Ms Chen, in China on 7 January 2021. The defendant challenged the service of the summons, seeking to set it aside on the basis it failed to comply with the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW). Counsel for the plaintiff argued the summons complied with the rules as originating process was not required in the circumstances. The Judge found for the plaintiff in the sum of ¥21,691,810.90 and ¥27,307,302.39 respectively, enforcing the civil mediation judgment of the People’s Court of Jimo District, Qingdao City, Shandong Providence, People’s Republic of China. Floor members Wayne Muddle SC and David Townsend appeared for the plaintiff instructed by Jurisbridge Legal.
Saitannis v Katsolos  NSWSC 1468
In Saitannis v Katsolos, Robb J considered whether the plaintiff daughter and son-in-law plaintiffs have a beneficial interest in property arising from equitable estoppel whereby the plaintiffs have spent significant capital renovating a property and claim to have done so upon representations by the defendant mother that the plaintiffs would become sole owners of property in defendant’s will. Additionally, the Court considered whether the family arrangement that involved a counter-assumption that the defendant would reside in the granny flat on property following renovations should influence the relief granted. Floor member James Pearson appeared as Counsel for the plaintiff, led by Christopher Wood SC from 13 Wentworth Chambers.
Cantor v Audi Australia Pty Limited (No 5)  FCA 637
In Cantor v Audi Australia Pty Limited (No 5), Foster J of the Federal Court considered whether the Court should approve settlement of five class actions brought against Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft (VWAG) in relation to Australian purchasers of Volkswagen-branded, Audi-branded and Skoda-branded diesel-powered motor vehicles that were fitted with a prohibited defeat device in the period 2008 – 2015. Additionally, the Court considered whether it had jurisdiction to make common fund orders at settlement pursuant to s 33V of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth). Foster J declined to make such an order on the basis that it was not “fair, just, equitable and in accordance with principle” to do so. Dr Peter Cashman appeared as Counsel for the Applicants in NSD 1307 of 2015 and NSD 1308 of 2015.
Zele v Clark  NSWSC 925
In Zele v Clark, Parker J considered the enforceability of a contract for the purchase of residential property where the vendor alleged the contracts exchanged without his authority and refused to complete due to hardship. Parker J found for the plaintiff purchasers and ordered specific performance of the contract. Floor member Paul Folino-Gallo appeared as Counsel for the plaintiff.
Glover v Kaji Australia Pty Limited  NSWCA 222
In Glover v Kaji Australia Pty Limited, MacFarlan JA with Bathurst CJ and White JA agreeing, considered an appeal whereby the appellant alleged multiple parties fraudulently conspired to procure him to obtain a short-term loan he was unable to repay and the learned trial judge had erred in exercising interpretation to prove allegations to the relevant Briginshaw standard. MacFarlan JA found that the findings by primary judge were credit-based and not in error, and dismissed the appeal with costs and the existing stay on execution and issue of a writ of possession was discharged. Floor members Paul Folino-Gallo and Nicholas Seow were Counsel for the first and second respondents.