IceTV Pty Ltd v Ross & Ors [2011] NSWSC 1211

IceTV Pty Ltd v Ross & Ors [2011] NSWSC 1211

Given the plaintiff’s entitlement to a judgment that has been upheld at trial and on two appellate occasions, and as the defendants’ proposed appeal concerns a discretionary interlocutory matter with remote prospects of success, a general stay is not justified. However, a short, limited stay is granted to permit urgent application to the Court of Appeal or until motions are heard together for convenience.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 September 2011
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Application for Stay of Execution of Judgment Pending Appeal
Outcome
Motion dismissed with costs. Limited stay granted.
Legal Topics
['stay of Execution' 'interlocutory Orders' 'appeals' 'discretionary Decisions' 'costs']
['practice and Procedure'] ['stay of Execution' 'interlocutory Orders' 'appeals' 'discretionary Decisions' 'costs']

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

Interlocutory Application / Application for Stay of Execution of Judgment Pending Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a stay of execution of judgment should be granted pending the determination of a proposed appeal' "Considerations relevant where the plaintiff's right to judgment has been upheld at successive appellate levels" 'Approach to applications where the prospects of success on appeal are low']

Ratio Decidendi

Given the plaintiff’s entitlement to a judgment that has been upheld at trial and on two appellate occasions, and as the defendants’ proposed appeal concerns a discretionary interlocutory matter with remote prospects of success, a general stay is not justified. However, a short, limited stay is granted to permit urgent application to the Court of Appeal or until motions are heard together for convenience.

Court Disposition

Motion dismissed with costs. Limited stay granted.

Orders

  • ["Defendants' motion for a stay filed 19 September 2011 dismissed with costs." 'Execution of the judgment and orders given on 18 September 2009 stayed until 7 November 2011.' "Defendants' motion filed 19 September 2011 to be heard together with plaintiff's motion filed 6 September 2011, both fixed for hearing on 27...