Saberi v Bakhshizadeh [2022] NSWCA 142
No error of principle or clear injustice was identified in the orders for security for costs, or the subsequent dismissal for non-provision of security; the applicant failed to establish any basis to set aside the discretionary interlocutory determinations or to justify leave to appeal.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 11 August 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Notice of Appeal—court of Appeal From Interlocutory Judgments of District Court
- Outcome
- Appeal and summons dismissed with costs.
- Legal Topics
- ['security for Costs' 'ordinarily Resident Outside Australia' 'application for Leave to Appeal' 'dismissal for Non Provision of Security']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Notice of Appeal—court of Appeal From Interlocutory Judgments of District Court
Legal Issues
- 1 ["Whether appellant was 'ordinarily resident outside of Australia' for purposes of security for costs (UCPR r 42.21(1)(a))" 'Whether the dismissal of the action for non-compliance with the security for costs order should be set aside' 'Whether there were any arguable grounds for grant of leave to appeal']
Ratio Decidendi
No error of principle or clear injustice was identified in the orders for security for costs, or the subsequent dismissal for non-provision of security; the applicant failed to establish any basis to set aside the discretionary interlocutory determinations or to justify leave to appeal.
Court Disposition
Appeal and summons dismissed with costs.
Orders
- ['Notice of appeal filed on 23 February 2022 dismissed as incompetent, with costs.' 'Summons seeking leave to appeal filed on 28 April 2022 dismissed with costs.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment