Christopher John Palmer v Millica Paula Talijancich [2018] NSWSC 1148

Christopher John Palmer v Millica Paula Talijancich [2018] NSWSC 1148

The application for a stay was refused because the process for sale and realisation of the asset had reached its final stage, the applicant had foreseen the possibility of vacating for some time, and no compelling reason was provided to set aside or restart the completed sale process.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Application for Stay of Writ for Possession / Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Application for stay refused
Legal Topics
['possession of Land' 'stay of Execution' 'writ for Possession']
['real Property'] ['possession of Land' 'stay of Execution' 'writ for Possession']

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 of Writ for Possession / Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether to grant a stay of execution of a writ for possession of residential premises']

Ratio Decidendi

The application for a stay was refused because the process for sale and realisation of the asset had reached its final stage, the applicant had foreseen the possibility of vacating for some time, and no compelling reason was provided to set aside or restart the completed sale process.

Court Disposition

Application for stay refused

Orders

  • ['The application for stay of the writ under discussion is refused.']