Donnelly and Anor. -V- Tenterfield S.C. and Ors. [1999] NSWLEC 142

Donnelly and Anor. -V- Tenterfield S.C. and Ors. [1999] NSWLEC 142

The Court was satisfied that the second and third respondents were relevantly persons entitled to enforce the judgment debt created by the filing of the costs certificate and were prima facie entitled to the examination order, but fairness required fixing the examination about one month later rather than one week later because the judgment debt and demand for payment had arisen only one week earlier. No conduct money was ordered, but the issue was left open for any later application by Mr Donnelly and Mr Mundine before the examination date.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 April 1999
Procedural Posture
Class 4 Proceedings; Notice of Motion for Examination of Judgment Debtors / Ex Parte Hearing of Motion by the Second and Third Respondents
Outcome
Motion granted, with examination date postponed to 26 May 1999 at 11am and no present order for conduct money.
Legal Topics
['examination of Judgment Debtors' 'enforcement of Judgment Debt' 'costs Assessment' 'conduct Money']
['practice and Procedure'] ['examination of Judgment Debtors' 'enforcement of Judgment Debt' 'costs Assessment' 'conduct Money']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Class 4 Proceedings; Notice of Motion for Examination of Judgment Debtors / Ex Parte Hearing of Motion by the Second and Third Respondents

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the second and third respondents were entitled to an order for examination of the applicants as judgment debtors.' 'Whether the examination should be fixed for 5 May 1999 or postponed to a later date.' 'Whether conduct money should be required for the persons ordered to attend the examination.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court was satisfied that the second and third respondents were relevantly persons entitled to enforce the judgment debt created by the filing of the costs certificate and were prima facie entitled to the examination order, but fairness required fixing the examination about one month later rather than one week later because the judgment debt and demand for payment had arisen only one week earlier. No conduct money was ordered, but the issue was left open for any later application by Mr Donnelly and Mr Mundine before the examination date.

Court Disposition

Motion granted, with examination date postponed to 26 May 1999 at 11am and no present order for conduct money.

Orders

  • ['The order sought for examination of David Mundine and Andrew Donnelly was made.' 'In lieu of 5 May 1999, Wednesday, 26 May 1999 at 11am was appointed as the time for the examination to be conducted.' 'No conduct money was required to be tendered, without prejudice to Mr Donnelly and Mr Mundine moving the Court...