JURY v WESTPAC BANKING CORPORATION [1996] NSWCA 285

JURY v WESTPAC BANKING CORPORATION [1996] NSWCA 285

The claimants failed to persuade the court that there were real prospects of success in the appeal, or that this was an appropriate case in which to grant a stay of execution. Claims about asset sale and receiver's conduct were not relevant to the appeal before the court.

Parties
Appellant: Jury; Respondent: Westpac Banking Corporation; Respondent: BAC; Appellant: Justal Pty Limited; Other: receiver
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 February 1996
Procedural Posture
Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal / Interlocutory Application in Court of Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Damages, Cross Claim, Receiver Powers
Commercial Law Stay of Execution Damages Cross Claim Receiver Powers

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jury

Appellant

Westpac Banking Corporation

Respondent

BAC

Respondent

Justal Pty Limited

Appellant

receiver

Other

Procedural Posture

Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal / Interlocutory Application in Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 whether a stay of execution should be granted pending appeal
  2. 2 whether damages for breach of duty by Westpac and BAC were properly denied

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants failed to persuade the court that there were real prospects of success in the appeal, or that this was an appropriate case in which to grant a stay of execution. Claims about asset sale and receiver's conduct were not relevant to the appeal before the court.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Application for a stay of execution is dismissed with costs