Neradovsky v Burnett [2015] NSWSC 1765

Neradovsky v Burnett [2015] NSWSC 1765

It is in the interests of justice to grant a conditional stay of the principal judgment upon payment of the judgment sum into a joint interest-bearing account, but disclosure of the insurance policy limit should be directed as it may assist resolution of the proceedings.

Parties
Plaintiff: Alison Jane Neradovsky; First Defendant: Karl Burnett; Second Defendant: KB Legals Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Application for Stay Pending Appeal / Interlocutory Ruling
Outcome
Conditional stay of judgment granted; direction for disclosure of insurance indemnity documents; costs of motion to be costs in the cause (appeal).
Legal Topics
Application for Stay Pending Appeal, Conditional Stay, Production of Documents, Indemnity, Costs in the Cause
Practice and Procedure Application for Stay Pending Appeal Conditional Stay Production of Documents Indemnity Costs in the Cause

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alison Jane Neradovsky

Plaintiff

Karl Burnett

First Defendant

KB Legals Pty Ltd

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Stay Pending Appeal / Interlocutory Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a stay of judgment should be granted pending appeal
  2. 2 Whether the defendants should be required to disclose the limit of their indemnity insurance policy

Ratio Decidendi

It is in the interests of justice to grant a conditional stay of the principal judgment upon payment of the judgment sum into a joint interest-bearing account, but disclosure of the insurance policy limit should be directed as it may assist resolution of the proceedings.

Court Disposition

Conditional stay of judgment granted; direction for disclosure of insurance indemnity documents; costs of motion to be costs in the cause (appeal).

Orders

  • Direct the defendants to answer the call made for documents that reveal the limit of their indemnity and note that the defendants are in a position to answer that call forthwith.
  • Grant a stay of order 1 made by Rothman J on 28 October 2015, namely, judgment for the plaintiff against the first and second defendants in the sum of $1,329,185.90, on condition that that amount be paid within seven days of the date of this order into an interest bearing account in the joint names of the solicitor...