Stankovic v Namul Pty Ltd (No 2) [2013] NSWCA 260

Mr Stankovic's applications were refused as his appeal did not have sufficient prospects of success and his application for pro bono assistance was without apparent merit and made late.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 08 August 2013
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Interlocutory Application Within Ongoing Appeal
Outcome: Notice of Motion dismissed with costs
Legal Topics: ['stay of Orders' 'pro Bono Legal Assistance' 'interlocutory Relief']

['civil Procedure'] ['stay of Orders' 'pro Bono Legal Assistance' 'interlocutory Relief']

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

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Interlocutory Application Within Ongoing Appeal

Legal Issues

1 ["Whether a stay of Rein J's orders should be granted" 'Whether the applicant should be referred for pro bono legal assistance']

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Stankovic's applications were refused as his appeal did not have sufficient prospects of success and his application for pro bono assistance was without apparent merit and made late.

Court Disposition

Notice of Motion dismissed with costs

Orders

["The Applicant's Notice of Motion filed on 22 July 2013 is dismissed with costs."]