Young v Hones (No.5) [2016] NSWSC 822

Young v Hones (No.5) [2016] NSWSC 822

Ms Young failed to demonstrate that she has an arguable case for damages in prospective proceedings, failed to provide evidence of prejudice or financial position, and the balance of convenience favours the respondents; accordingly, the application for restraining orders is dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Application for Restraining Order on Enforcement of Costs Order
Outcome
Notice of Motion dismissed
Legal Topics
['restraining Orders' 'enforcement of Costs' 'stay of Proceedings' 'bankruptcy' "advocate's Immunity" 'witness Immunity']

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 / Application for Restraining Order on Enforcement of Costs Order

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court has power to make the restraining order under Civil Procedure Act 2005 s 135' 'Whether enforcement steps under Bankruptcy Act can be restrained' 'Whether applicant has an arguable case in prospective proceedings against respondents' 'Whether applicant would suffer prejudice if restraining order not made' 'Whether balance of convenience favours making the restraining order']

Ratio Decidendi

Ms Young failed to demonstrate that she has an arguable case for damages in prospective proceedings, failed to provide evidence of prejudice or financial position, and the balance of convenience favours the respondents; accordingly, the application for restraining orders is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Notice of Motion dismissed

Orders

  • ['Notice of Motion dated 7 June 2016 dismissed.' "Applicant to pay the Respondents' costs."]