White v Thompson [2010] NSWCA 262

White v Thompson [2010] NSWCA 262

The applicants had not demonstrated a basis for a stay of the costs orders that would be fair to all parties: despite claiming their assets were illiquid, they had not shown hardship if the respondents pursued costs assessment, nor made an attempt to preserve the status quo so the respondents would not be worse off if the appeal failed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 September 2010
Procedural Posture
Application for Stay Pending Appeal / Notice of Motion in the New South Wales Court of Appeal
Outcome
Motion dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['stay Pending Appeal' 'costs Orders' 'costs Assessment']
['civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['stay Pending Appeal' 'costs Orders' 'costs Assessment']

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 Stay Pending Appeal / Notice of Motion in the New South Wales Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether order 2 made by Windeyer AJ on 15 October 2009 requiring payment of costs should be stayed pending the hearing and determination of the appeal.' 'Whether enforcement of the costs order, including filing any certificate of determination on assessment of costs or associated costs judgment orders, should be stayed pending the appeal.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants had not demonstrated a basis for a stay of the costs orders that would be fair to all parties: despite claiming their assets were illiquid, they had not shown hardship if the respondents pursued costs assessment, nor made an attempt to preserve the status quo so the respondents would not be worse off if the appeal failed.

Court Disposition

Motion dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The notice of motion of 14 September 2010 was dismissed with costs.']