Siminton v Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (No 2) [2008] FCAFC 112

Siminton v Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (No 2) [2008] FCAFC 112

The stay was refused because the subject matter of the proposed litigation was Mr Siminton's liability to be committed to prison for twelve months for contempts found by Tracey J, and serving up to two months before the special leave application was heard would not render the application or any appeal nugatory. The case was distinguishable from circumstances where the whole or most substantial part of a sentence would expire before special leave was determined, and the prospects of obtaining special leave were assessed as remote.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Application for Stay Pending Proposed Application for Special Leave to Appeal to the High Court of Australia / Full Court of the Federal Court After Dismissal of an Appeal From Contempt and Imprisonment Orders
Outcome
Application for a stay refused with costs.
Legal Topics
['stay Pending Special Leave Application' 'execution of Committal Warrant' 'contempt for Breach of Interlocutory Orders' 'banking Act Injunctions']
['civil Procedure' 'contempt of Court' 'banking Regulation' 'appellate Procedure'] ['stay Pending Special Leave Application' 'execution of Committal Warrant' 'contempt for Breach of Interlocutory Orders' 'banking Act Injunctions']

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 Stay Pending Proposed Application for Special Leave to Appeal to the High Court of Australia / Full Court of the Federal Court After Dismissal of an Appeal From Contempt and Imprisonment Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Full Court should stay Order 6 made on 30 May 2008 pending the hearing and determination of a proposed application for special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia.' 'Whether refusal of a stay would render the proposed special leave application and any subsequent appeal nugatory because the applicant would likely serve up to two months of a twelve month sentence before the special leave application was heard.' 'Whether the prospects of obtaining special leave to appeal justified the grant of a stay.']

Ratio Decidendi

The stay was refused because the subject matter of the proposed litigation was Mr Siminton's liability to be committed to prison for twelve months for contempts found by Tracey J, and serving up to two months before the special leave application was heard would not render the application or any appeal nugatory. The case was distinguishable from circumstances where the whole or most substantial part of a sentence would expire before special leave was determined, and the prospects of obtaining special leave were assessed as remote.

Court Disposition

Application for a stay refused with costs.

Orders

  • ['The application for a stay of Order 6 of the Full Court made on 30 May 2008 in proceedings VID1153/2007 is refused.' 'The applicant on the Notice of Motion pay the costs of the respondent on the Notice of Motion, to be taxed if not agreed.']