Ye v Chen [2021] NSWSC 1098

Ye v Chen [2021] NSWSC 1098

Ms Chen's amended notice of motion to dismiss the proceedings under UCPR 13.4 and 50.16A was dismissed because the grounds of appeal raised by Ms Ye and Ucer Investment, though weak, were not hopeless or incompetent; questions regarding procedural fairness and construction of the guarantee should be properly determined at the final hearing; as Ms Chen was unsuccessful on her application, the defendant is to pay the plaintiffs' costs on an ordinary basis.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Rebecca Ye; Second Plaintiff: Ucer Investment and Resources and Management Pty Ltd; First Defendant: Yu Chen
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 August 2021
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion for Summary Judgment / Appeal From Local Court / Interlocutory Application, Summary Judgment on Appeal, Orders on Costs
Outcome
Application dismissed; costs awarded against applicant
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Procedural Fairness, Interpretation of Guarantees, Security for Costs, Appeals From Local Court
Practice and Procedure Contract Law Summary Judgment Procedural Fairness Interpretation of Guarantees Security for Costs Appeals From Local Court

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 6 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rebecca Ye

First Plaintiff

Ucer Investment and Resources and Management Pty Ltd

Second Plaintiff

Yu Chen

First Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion for Summary Judgment / Appeal From Local Court / Interlocutory Application, Summary Judgment on Appeal, Orders on Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appeal is incompetent or hopeless under UCPR 13.4 and 50.16A
  2. 2 Whether Ms Ye and Ucer Investment's grounds of appeal, particularly relating to procedural fairness and the construction of the guarantee, disclose a real prospect of success
  3. 3 Whether leave and extension of time to appeal should be granted for interlocutory orders

Ratio Decidendi

Ms Chen's amended notice of motion to dismiss the proceedings under UCPR 13.4 and 50.16A was dismissed because the grounds of appeal raised by Ms Ye and Ucer Investment, though weak, were not hopeless or incompetent; questions regarding procedural fairness and construction of the guarantee should be properly determined at the final hearing; as Ms Chen was unsuccessful on her application, the defendant is to pay the plaintiffs' costs on an ordinary basis.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; costs awarded against applicant

Orders

  • Ms Chen's amended notice of motion filed 18 June 2021 is dismissed.
  • The defendant is to pay the plaintiffs' costs on an ordinary basis.