Fordyce v Ho [2015] NSWCA 240

Fordyce v Ho [2015] NSWCA 240

Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed appeal from interlocutory search order rulings had no substantial practical utility: the search order had already been executed, relevant material would in any event be available through discovery, non-relevant material remained subject to confidentiality undertakings and the Court's control, the amount in dispute was not significant and likely to be matched by appeal costs, and prosecution of the appeal would not advance the just, quick and cheap resolution of the real issues in the underlying proceedings.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 August 2015
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal Against an Ex Parte Search Order and an Order Dismissing a Motion to Set Aside That Search Order / Court of Appeal Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'ex Parte Search Order' 'interlocutory Orders' 'legal Costs Agreements' 'overriding Purpose']
['practice and Procedure' 'legal Profession'] ['leave to Appeal' 'ex Parte Search Order' 'interlocutory Orders' 'legal Costs Agreements' 'overriding Purpose']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal Against an Ex Parte Search Order and an Order Dismissing a Motion to Set Aside That Search Order / Court of Appeal Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal should be granted from interlocutory orders comprising the ex parte search order and the refusal to set it aside.' 'Whether there was practical utility in pursuing an appeal after the search order had been executed and where relevant material would remain available through discovery.' 'Whether the proposed appeal was justified having regard to the modest amount in dispute in the underlying legal costs proceedings and the overriding purpose in s 56 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW).']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed appeal from interlocutory search order rulings had no substantial practical utility: the search order had already been executed, relevant material would in any event be available through discovery, non-relevant material remained subject to confidentiality undertakings and the Court's control, the amount in dispute was not significant and likely to be matched by appeal costs, and prosecution of the appeal would not advance the just, quick and cheap resolution of the real issues in the underlying proceedings.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Application for leave to appeal dismissed.' "Order the applicants pay the respondents' costs of the application."]