Tyneside Property Management Pty Ltd v Hammersmith Management Pty Ltd (No 2) [2015] NSWCA 37

Tyneside Property Management Pty Ltd v Hammersmith Management Pty Ltd (No 2) [2015] NSWCA 37

The amendment motion was dismissed because the appellants established no basis for leave to file an amended notice of appeal, no basis for varying the orders of 5 December 2014 on the footing that the appeal had prospects of success, and in substance sought impermissibly to re-agitate the same evidence and arguments already considered by the Court.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Procedural and Other Ruling in Appeal Concerning a Notice of Motion to Set Aside or Vary Earlier Orders, Seek Leave to File an Amended Notice of Appeal, and Require Withdrawal of Respondents' Solicitors / On the Papers in the NSW Court of Appeal After Orders Made on 5 December 2014 Concerning Review Motions, Security for Costs and Dismissal of the Appeal
Outcome
Notice of motion filed on 19 December 2014 dismissed; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['setting Aside or Varying Judgments and Orders' 'security for Costs' 'leave to Amend Notice of Appeal' 'principle of Finality' 're Opening a Case After Full Argument']
['civil Procedure' 'appeals' 'costs'] ['setting Aside or Varying Judgments and Orders' 'security for Costs' 'leave to Amend Notice of Appeal' 'principle of Finality' 're Opening a Case After Full Argument']

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

Procedural and Other Ruling in Appeal Concerning a Notice of Motion to Set Aside or Vary Earlier Orders, Seek Leave to File an Amended Notice of Appeal, and Require Withdrawal of Respondents' Solicitors / On the Papers in the NSW Court of Appeal After Orders Made on 5 December 2014 Concerning Review Motions, Security for Costs and Dismissal of the Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the orders made on 5 December 2014 should be set aside or varied.' 'Whether the appellants should be granted leave to file an amended notice of appeal.' 'Whether the amendment motion impermissibly sought to re-agitate evidence and arguments already advanced.' 'Whether any change of circumstances or other justification warranted re-opening the motions disposed of on 5 December 2014.']

Ratio Decidendi

The amendment motion was dismissed because the appellants established no basis for leave to file an amended notice of appeal, no basis for varying the orders of 5 December 2014 on the footing that the appeal had prospects of success, and in substance sought impermissibly to re-agitate the same evidence and arguments already considered by the Court.

Court Disposition

Notice of motion filed on 19 December 2014 dismissed; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ['Notice of motion filed on 19 December 2014 be dismissed.' 'No order as to costs.']