Kyriakou v Jiang [2013] NSWCA 105

Kyriakou v Jiang [2013] NSWCA 105

The applicant did not establish that Barrett JA's orders were infected with error or that his Honour's discretion miscarried. Olsson DCJ had power to impose a condition requiring payments equivalent to rent when staying the Tribunal's possession order, the condition was not on its face unreasonable, and the applicant's prospects of challenging that order were insufficient to justify the further stay sought.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 April 2013
Procedural Posture
Application for Review / Review by the Court of Appeal of Barrett Ja's 22 April 2013 Refusal of a Stay
Outcome
The application is dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['judicial Review' 'review of Judge of Appeal' 'stay of Eviction Order' 'condition to Pay Rent Pending Appeal' 'consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Orders']
['administrative Law' 'procedure' 'residential Tenancy'] ['judicial Review' 'review of Judge of Appeal' 'stay of Eviction Order' 'condition to Pay Rent Pending Appeal' 'consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Orders']

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 Review / Review by the Court of Appeal of Barrett Ja's 22 April 2013 Refusal of a Stay

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether Barrett JA's refusal of a stay was infected with error or was wrong." "Whether Olsson DCJ had power under s 67(5) of the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Act 2001 to stay the Tribunal's order on terms requiring payments equivalent to rent." 'Whether the applicant discharged the heavy burden on an application for review of this kind.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant did not establish that Barrett JA's orders were infected with error or that his Honour's discretion miscarried. Olsson DCJ had power to impose a condition requiring payments equivalent to rent when staying the Tribunal's possession order, the condition was not on its face unreasonable, and the applicant's prospects of challenging that order were insufficient to justify the further stay sought.

Court Disposition

The application is dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application for review is dismissed with costs.']