Yufeng v Guo [2026] NSWCA 3

In Yufeng v Guo [2026] NSWCA 3, the Court of Appeal delivered an important judgment about admissions, and the requirements applicable to withdrawing admissions. This clarifies the position under UCPR 12.6, which had been the subject of differing trial court rulings.

At [41], Kirk JA (Bell CJ and Adamson J agreeing) held that an admission is statement which is responsive to something – so generally, allegations in a statement of claim will not be ‘admissions’.

Thus, where a plaintiff seeks to amend its Statement of Claim, this does not require it to comply with the rules governing withdrawal of admissions. If the defendant does not oppose the amendment, it cannot later complain that the plaintiff failed to follow the rules about withdrawing admissions. It might seek leave to reopen the grant of the amendment during the trial, but it bears the onus of establishing that it made a mistake in not opposing the amendment earlier.

At [60], Kirk JA said the defendant certainly may not do so on appeal ‘when the issue is raised not at the heel of the hunt but when the hunt is over’.

Tim Castle SC and Dana Levi appeared for the successful respondent on the appeal, which was dismissed with costs, instructed by Ge Wu at Legal Point Lawyers.

https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/19c25a2fcadcc6a6ab4fe07c

Legal 500 Rankings 2026

6 St James Hall is delighted that its members have once again been recognised in the Legal 500 Asia Pacific 2026.

Dr Christopher Ward SC, Tim Castle SC and Alexander Flecknoe-Brown have been individually recognised in one of their areas of expertise, Commercial Disputes.

The barristers of 6 St James Hall have expertise in a wide range of disputes, including commercial, corporate and industrial matters, financial services, insolvency, franchising and international law.  This recognition in Commercial Disputes reflects the breadth as well as depth of our barristers’ commercial experience, enhanced by complementary skills in related practice areas.

Enquiries to retain any of our barristers, including as to availability and urgency, can be discussed with the chambers’ Clerk and Practice Manager, Nora Faulua.

Inadvertent Failure to Register a PMSI

Recently, Tim Castle SC of 6 St James Hall and Ingrid King of 10 St James Hall were successful in obtaining orders from Black J, to extend the time to register two PMSIs, over $10m worth of mining machines.  

The plaintiff hired two underground mining machines for use in the Dartbrook Coal Mine. A company officer registered the two machines on the PPSR, following a precedent used in a prior transaction. Unbeknown to the company officer, the hire agreements gave rise to ‘PPS Leases’ under s.13 of the Personal Property Securities Act (PPSA) and PMSIs under s.14. A clear case of inadvertence.

When the mine went into administration and receivership, the primary secured creditor claimed priority under its ALLPAP. One of the plaintiff’s registrations took effect as an ordinary security interest. The other had not been registered in time and vested in the administrator. However the primary secured creditor did not show either prejudice or reliance on the plaintiff’s erroneous registrations.

The Court was persuaded to exercise the extension powers under PPSA s.293 to extend the PMSI time, and Corporations Act s.588FM to extend the time to lodge a new, correct registration. Both powers were needed as there is no power in the PPSA to amend an existing registration, and new registrations were required.

Marcus Connor of Connor & Co was the instructing solicitor with assistance from Amanda Johnston and Ena Kennedy Yoshitani. Additional counsel assistance provided by Dana Levi of Ground Floor Wentworth Chambers and Stephanie Erian of 6 St James Hall.

The case will be of interest to all lawyers practicing in the area of finance and PPS securities: In the matter of Dartbrook Commercial Pty Ltd [2025] NSWSC 1075