Muriniti v Kalil [2021] NSWCA 81

Stay refused for the costs assessment process, as restitution is available and the process is well advanced; stay granted for enforcement of any award pending hearing of leave application where enforcement may cause inconvenience and financial stress, recoverability is secured, and no hardship shown.

Parties: First Applicant: Leonardo Carlo Muriniti; Second Applicant: Robert Duane Newell; First Respondent: Mahmoud Kalil; Second Respondent: Kylie Eather
Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 01 March 2021
Procedural Posture: Application for Stay / Interlocutory Order Pending Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome: Stay granted in part
Legal Topics: Stay of Costs Orders, Costs Assessment, Enforcement of Judgment

Civil Procedure Stay of Costs Orders Costs Assessment Enforcement of Judgment

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3

Parties

Leonardo Carlo Muriniti

First Applicant

Robert Duane Newell

Second Applicant

Mahmoud Kalil

First Respondent

Kylie Eather

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Stay / Interlocutory Order Pending Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

1 Should enforcement of an anticipated costs assessment award be stayed pending hearing of application for leave to appeal?
2 Should the costs assessment process itself be stayed?

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Stay granted in part

Orders

Enforcement of any award made by a costs assessor or a review panel on the application for costs assessment currently pending under the orders of Wass DCJ made on 24 July 2020 be stayed until the hearing of the application for leave to appeal.
Costs of the application be costs in the application for leave to appeal.