O'Shannassy v Sarina [2024] FCA 378

The application for stay is dismissed as the respondents have complied with the orders below, the burden on the applicant is minimal, and the matter is properly for the primary judge; any saving of time and effort was already considered when a stay was refused below.

Parties: Applicant: John O'Shannassy; First Respondent: Clinton Sarina; Second Respondent: Martin Green
Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 12 April 2024
Procedural Posture: Application for Stay / Interlocutory Determination of Stay Pending Leave to Appeal
Outcome: Application for stay dismissed
Legal Topics: Stay of Proceedings, Provable Debts in Bankruptcy, Damages Assessment, Programming Orders

Practice and Procedure Bankruptcy Defamation Stay of Proceedings Provable Debts in Bankruptcy Damages Assessment Programming Orders

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2

Parties

John O'Shannassy

Applicant

Clinton Sarina

First Respondent

Martin Green

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Stay / Interlocutory Determination of Stay Pending Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

1 Whether the proceeding below should be stayed pending the determination of an application for leave to appeal and any appeal
2 Whether assessed damages for defamation are provable in bankruptcy under s 82(2) of the Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth)

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application for stay dismissed

Orders

The applicant's application for a stay of the proceeding below be dismissed.
The costs of the application for a stay be costs in the application for leave to appeal.