Malouf v Prince [2008] NSWCA 153

Malouf v Prince [2008] NSWCA 153

The stay was granted because the trial judge's refusal of an adjournment contained a material error of principle regarding compensation of financial losses through costs, and was otherwise unreasonable or plainly unjust, as it would effectively prevent the plaintiff from prosecuting his claim.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Appeal / Application for Stay Pending Appeal
Outcome
Stay granted (order 1 in the Notice of Motion)
Legal Topics
['adjournment' 'stay of Proceedings' 'indemnity Costs' 'defamation']
['civil Procedure'] ['adjournment' 'stay of Proceedings' 'indemnity Costs' 'defamation']

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

Notice of Motion / Appeal / Application for Stay Pending Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the trial judge erred in refusing an adjournment and ordering the matter to proceed to hearing' "Whether a stay of proceedings should be granted pending determination of the plaintiff's application for leave to appeal and/or appeal against the District Court's orders"]

Ratio Decidendi

The stay was granted because the trial judge's refusal of an adjournment contained a material error of principle regarding compensation of financial losses through costs, and was otherwise unreasonable or plainly unjust, as it would effectively prevent the plaintiff from prosecuting his claim.

Court Disposition

Stay granted (order 1 in the Notice of Motion)

Orders

  • ["Proceedings below are stayed pending the resolution of the applicant's application for leave to appeal and/or appeal, except that order for mediation (Order 3) is exempt from the stay." 'Costs of the Notice of Motion for the stay to be costs in the cause below.']