Singh v De Castro; Dhaliwal v De Castro; Brar v De Castro [2017] NSWCA 130

Singh v De Castro; Dhaliwal v De Castro; Brar v De Castro [2017] NSWCA 130

Non-compliances with procedural directions and late filing/serving were not of such magnitude as to warrant dismissal of the appeals; no special circumstances were demonstrated to justify an order for security for costs as impecuniosity alone is insufficient.

Parties
Appellant: Harjit Singh; Appellant: Moninderjit Singh; Appellant: Mandhir Singh Sandha; Appellant: Sukhdev Singh Dhaliwal; Appellant: Gurmeet Singh Brar; Respondent: Ignacio De Castro; Respondent: Leticia De Castro
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 June 2017
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Motion for Dismissal and Security for Costs; Interlocutory Orders
Outcome
Amended Notice of Motion dismissed; costs of motion to be costs in appeal; time for filing and serving notices of appeal extended.
Legal Topics
Appeal Out of Time, Security for Costs, Extension of Time, Dismissal of Appeal
Civil Procedure Appeal Out of Time Security for Costs Extension of Time Dismissal of Appeal

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Harjit Singh

Appellant

Moninderjit Singh

Appellant

Mandhir Singh Sandha

Appellant

Sukhdev Singh Dhaliwal

Appellant

Gurmeet Singh Brar

Appellant

Ignacio De Castro

Respondent

Leticia De Castro

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Motion for Dismissal and Security for Costs; Interlocutory Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appeals should be dismissed due to non-compliance with procedural directions and late filing/serving of appeal notices
  2. 2 Whether security for costs should be ordered based on special circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

Non-compliances with procedural directions and late filing/serving were not of such magnitude as to warrant dismissal of the appeals; no special circumstances were demonstrated to justify an order for security for costs as impecuniosity alone is insufficient.

Court Disposition

Amended Notice of Motion dismissed; costs of motion to be costs in appeal; time for filing and serving notices of appeal extended.

Orders

  • Dismiss the Amended Notice of Motion filed on behalf of Mr and Mrs De Castro
  • Order that the parties' costs of the motion be costs in the appeal