ALS131 Pty Ltd v Rahme [2020] NSWSC 654

ALS131 Pty Ltd v Rahme [2020] NSWSC 654

Leave was refused because the proposed notice of motion proceeded on the mistaken basis that the notice of motion filed on 26 February 2020 was still on foot, when it had been dismissed by Fullerton J on 14 May 2020; the proposed orders had no utility, no stay of the writ of possession was sought, and the supporting...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 May 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure Application for Leave to File Notice of Motion / Duty Judge Application on 18 May 2020
Outcome
The defendant's application for leave to file her Notice of Motion dated 18 May 2020 was refused, with no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
['leave to File Notice of Motion' 'urgent Applications' 'writ of Possession' 'self Represented Litigants' 'costs']
['civil Procedure'] ['leave to File Notice of Motion' 'urgent Applications' 'writ of Possession' 'self Represented Litigants' 'costs']

Source-derived case record

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

Civil Procedure Application for Leave to File Notice of Motion / Duty Judge Application on 18 May 2020

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendant should be granted leave to file her Notice of Motion dated 18 May 2020.' 'Whether the proposed orders had any utility in circumstances where the notice of motion filed on 26 February 2020 had been dismissed on 14 May 2020.' 'Whether the defendant identified any new matter or proper basis for further orders concerning the writ of possession.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because the proposed notice of motion proceeded on the mistaken basis that the notice of motion filed on 26 February 2020 was still on foot, when it had been dismissed by Fullerton J on 14 May 2020; the proposed orders had no utility, no stay of the writ of possession was sought, and the supporting affidavit and submissions disclosed no new or proper basis for the application.

Court Disposition

The defendant's application for leave to file her Notice of Motion dated 18 May 2020 was refused, with no order as to costs.

Orders

  • ['The application by the defendant seeking leave to file in court her Notice of Motion dated 18 May 2020 is refused.' 'No order as to costs.']