Wende v Horwath (NSW) Pty Limited (No 4) [2015] NSWDC 158

Wende v Horwath (NSW) Pty Limited (No 4) [2015] NSWDC 158

The stay was refused because, despite the possibility that costs might be wasted if the Court of Appeal set aside an earlier decision, the interests of justice were best served by completing the District Court proceedings. Finalising the outstanding costs issues would lessen delay, the matter would return to the District Court for further orders whatever the Court of Appeal decided if not finalised, completion could assist the Court of Appeal by providing the result of the whole matter, the outstanding issues were brief and could be dealt with expeditiously, and the Court of Appeal application had not been listed for hearing.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Application for a Stay / Procedural Ruling on Plaintiffs' Application for a Stay Pending Determination of an Application for Judicial Review in the Court of Appeal
Outcome
Stay of the District Court proceedings refused; leave granted to file an affidavit; directions made for evidence, submissions, listing and liberty to apply.
Legal Topics
['application for a Stay' 'costs' 'judicial Review' 'procedural Directions']
['practice and Procedure'] ['application for a Stay' 'costs' 'judicial Review' 'procedural Directions']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Civil Application for a Stay / Procedural Ruling on Plaintiffs' Application for a Stay Pending Determination of an Application for Judicial Review in the Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether proceedings in the District Court should be stayed pending determination of an application for judicial review filed in the Court of Appeal.' 'How the outstanding questions concerning costs should proceed if a stay is refused.']

Ratio Decidendi

The stay was refused because, despite the possibility that costs might be wasted if the Court of Appeal set aside an earlier decision, the interests of justice were best served by completing the District Court proceedings. Finalising the outstanding costs issues would lessen delay, the matter would return to the District Court for further orders whatever the Court of Appeal decided if not finalised, completion could assist the Court of Appeal by providing the result of the whole matter, the outstanding issues were brief and could be dealt with expeditiously, and the Court of Appeal application had not been listed for hearing.

Court Disposition

Stay of the District Court proceedings refused; leave granted to file an affidavit; directions made for evidence, submissions, listing and liberty to apply.

Orders

  • ['Leave granted to file in court the affidavit of Michael Andrew Clear dated 5 February 2015.' 'The stay of the proceedings in the District Court is refused.' 'Direct the plaintiffs to file and serve any evidence on which they intend to rely with respect to the outstanding questions by 4 March 2015.' 'Direct that...