SUN v TESLA

In an earlier decision, the Court imposed court access restrictions on the Plaintiffs. The Plaintiffs brought an Application to satisfy the leave requirements as set out by the Court in the earlier decision.

After canvassing the jurisprudence regarding the test for leave to file further records, Rooke ACJ concluded that the Plaintiffs failed to establish a factual, or alleged factual, basis for continuing the underlying litigation. Rooke ACJ held that the Defendant is entitled to costs pursuant to Rule 10.29(1). Further, after considering factors under Rule 10.33, Associate Chief Justice Rooke ordered a costs award against the Plaintiffs. Rooke ACJ further noted that there was no Appeal mechanism available to the Plaintiffs under Rule 10.45(4) and dispensed with the Plaintiffs’ approval of the Order pursuant to Rule 9.4(2)(c).