Home | © 2019 GA Publishing Mosman Sydney for legal practitioners


Bird v Bird (No 4) [2012] NSWSC 648. Rein J. 5.6.12. 

158 Laches does not apply to claims that are governed expressly or by analogy to a statute of limitation: see Meagher, Gummow and Lehane's equity: doctrines and remedies at [36-045]; see also Archbold v Scully (1861) 9 HLC 360 at 383 and Re Birch (1884) 27 Ch D 622. Although the defences of acquiescence and estoppel remain available to claims governed by a statute of limitation, it is unclear how acquiescence or estoppel could apply in the circumstances and, in the absence of submissions by any of the defendants on these defences, I do not think I should consider them further.

Previous page: Just and reasonable     Next page: Legal professional privilege

© 2019 GA Publishing Mosman Sydney | piets/wcms | Account

Common Law Monthly Summaries

12 editions $385 incl GST

Subscribe Sample