Bentran Pty Ltd v Sabbarton [2014] NSWCATAP 37

Bentran Pty Ltd v Sabbarton [2014] NSWCATAP 37

The appellant provided no sufficient basis to demonstrate that it is appropriate to grant a stay; no circumstances were shown that would make a stay reasonably necessary to secure the effectiveness of the appeal, nor was there evidence of irreparable harm if the payment was made. The balance of convenience and interests of justice did not favour granting a stay.

Parties
Appellant: Bentran Pty Ltd t/as Camzilla (Barry Jacobs); Respondent: John Sabbarton
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 August 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Stay Pending Appeal
Outcome
Appellant's application for a stay refused
Legal Topics
Stay of Orders Pending Appeal, Appeals in Civil and Administrative Tribunal
Administrative Law Stay of Orders Pending Appeal Appeals in Civil and Administrative Tribunal

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 6 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bentran Pty Ltd t/as Camzilla (Barry Jacobs)

Appellant

John Sabbarton

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Stay Pending Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a stay of the order should be granted pending the outcome of the appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant provided no sufficient basis to demonstrate that it is appropriate to grant a stay; no circumstances were shown that would make a stay reasonably necessary to secure the effectiveness of the appeal, nor was there evidence of irreparable harm if the payment was made. The balance of convenience and interests of justice did not favour granting a stay.

Court Disposition

Appellant's application for a stay refused

Orders

  • The appellant's application for a stay is refused.