Etl v Kliger Partners [2008] FCA 602

Etl v Kliger Partners [2008] FCA 602

The applicant provided no argument or evidence suggesting the trial judge erred in discretion or that substantial injustice would occur if leave were refused. No doubt attends the interlocutory decision, and there is no basis for enlargement of time or leave to appeal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 April 2008
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal / Interlocutory Decision
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
['extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Judgment' 'sequestration Order' 'adjournment' 'exercise of Discretion']

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 Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal / Interlocutory Decision

  1. 1 ['Should the applicant be granted an extension of time to file and serve a notice of appeal from an interlocutory judgment?' 'Does the refusal of an adjournment warrant leave to appeal?' 'Was there substantial injustice to the applicant?']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant provided no argument or evidence suggesting the trial judge erred in discretion or that substantial injustice would occur if leave were refused. No doubt attends the interlocutory decision, and there is no basis for enlargement of time or leave to appeal.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • ["The applicant's application for an extension of time to file and serve a notice of appeal be refused." 'The costs of Geoffrey Kliger, Aitan Schmideg, Roger Elliot Rothfield, David Brown, Andrew Suddick, Glenys Jardine, Savas Miriklis and Robert Lewis of and incidental to the motion be costs in the bankruptcy.'...