Halim v Duncan [2016] NSWSC 413

Halim v Duncan [2016] NSWSC 413

It was appropriate to stay execution of the writ for possession for a further four weeks because the first defendant had indicated an intention to vacate but needed time to remove possessions, the property had not yet been placed on the market, and there was no material suggesting he had prevented or would prevent access for appraisal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 April 2016
Procedural Posture
Application for Stay of a Writ for Possession / Ex Tempore Ruling in the Equity Duty List on the First Defendant's Notice of Motion Filed 29 March 2016
Outcome
Temporary stay granted; first defendant's notice of motion otherwise dismissed.
Legal Topics
['ejectment' 'execution' 'stay of Writ for Possession']
['real Property' 'civil Procedure'] ['ejectment' 'execution' 'stay of 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 a Writ for Possession / Ex Tempore Ruling in the Equity Duty List on the First Defendant's Notice of Motion Filed 29 March 2016

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether execution of the writ of possession should be stayed for a further period to allow the first defendant to vacate and remove possessions from the property.']

Ratio Decidendi

It was appropriate to stay execution of the writ for possession for a further four weeks because the first defendant had indicated an intention to vacate but needed time to remove possessions, the property had not yet been placed on the market, and there was no material suggesting he had prevented or would prevent access for appraisal.

Court Disposition

Temporary stay granted; first defendant's notice of motion otherwise dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Stay the execution of the writ of possession issued on 3 February 2016 up to and including 3 May 2016.' "Direct the first defendant, when the matter is next before the Family Provision List judge on 21 April 2016, to provide that judge with a report in writing on that occasion as to the first defendant's progress...