Bendigo & Adelaide Bank Ltd v Karamihos [2014] NSWSC 1045

No exceptional circumstances were demonstrated to justify granting a stay of execution of the Writ of Possession, particularly where similar applications had been previously refused by the Court of Appeal and the High Court on the same grounds.

Parties: Plaintiff: Bendigo & Adelaide Bank Ltd; Defendant: Steve Karamihos; Defendant: Aristea Karamihos
Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 29 July 2014
Procedural Posture: Civil / Interlocutory Application for Stay of Execution of Writ of Possession
Outcome: Notice of Motion for stay dismissed; orders made to regularise proceedings; costs ordered against defendants.
Legal Topics: Stay of Execution, Writ of Possession, Exceptional Circumstances in Granting Stay

Civil Procedure Stay of Execution Writ of Possession Exceptional Circumstances in Granting Stay

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Bendigo & Adelaide Bank Ltd

Plaintiff

Steve Karamihos

Defendant

Aristea Karamihos

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application for Stay of Execution of Writ of Possession

Legal Issues

1 Whether a stay of the execution of a Writ of Possession should be granted pending an application for special leave to the High Court
2 Whether exceptional circumstances exist to justify a stay

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Notice of Motion for stay dismissed; orders made to regularise proceedings; costs ordered against defendants.

Orders

Grant leave to the defendants to file in Court a Notice of Motion dated 29 July 2014.
Order that the Notice of Motion be returnable instanter.