Herscho v. Expile Pty. Limited [2004] NSWCA 468

Herscho v. Expile Pty. Limited [2004] NSWCA 468

The applicant failed to establish that the asserted grounds of appeal or the evidence of risk of non-recovery were sufficient to warrant a stay of judgment, particularly having regard to the policy of the Security of Payment Act.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 December 2004
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Stay Pending Appeal
Outcome
Notice of Motion dismissed
Legal Topics
['stay of Judgment' 'security of Payment' 'appeals']
['civil Procedure' 'building and Construction Law'] ['stay of Judgment' 'security of Payment' 'appeals']

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

Appeal / Application for Stay Pending Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a stay of judgment pursuant to the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act should be granted pending appeal' 'Whether there is a real risk of prejudice if the stay is not granted' 'Whether asserted grounds of appeal provide sufficient basis for stay']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to establish that the asserted grounds of appeal or the evidence of risk of non-recovery were sufficient to warrant a stay of judgment, particularly having regard to the policy of the Security of Payment Act.

Court Disposition

Notice of Motion dismissed

Orders

  • ['Notice of Motion dismissed' "Claimant ordered to pay the opponent's costs"]