Wang v Farkas (No 5) [2015] NSWCA 77

Wang v Farkas (No 5) [2015] NSWCA 77

The purpose for providing security by way of a bank guarantee has been fulfilled as no further proceedings in the High Court are contemplated. There is no clear reason why security should not be released, and no exceptional circumstances support variation of the security order.

Parties
First Applicant: James Wang; Second Applicant: Y Ping Gu; Respondent: George Farkas
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Application / Interlocutory
Outcome
No orders made
Legal Topics
Release of Security, Extension of Time, Overriding Purpose, Civil Procedure Act 2005 (nsw) S 56
Practice and Procedure Release of Security Extension of Time Overriding Purpose Civil Procedure Act 2005 (nsw) S 56

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Wang

First Applicant

Y Ping Gu

Second Applicant

George Farkas

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application / Interlocutory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proceeds of a bank guarantee should be released to the applicants
  2. 2 Whether an extension of time should be granted to the respondent to present his case in response
  3. 3 Whether any amount should be retained as security for potential costs owed to the respondent

Ratio Decidendi

The purpose for providing security by way of a bank guarantee has been fulfilled as no further proceedings in the High Court are contemplated. There is no clear reason why security should not be released, and no exceptional circumstances support variation of the security order.

Court Disposition

No orders made