Harrison v Harris (No 3) [2013] NSWLEC 140

Harrison v Harris (No 3) [2013] NSWLEC 140

The application for stay was dismissed as the Court found no proper basis for granting a stay under the Alexander discretion: Mr Harris had agreed to costs and publication orders, reputational harm had already occurred, the Court was not persuaded that any appeal would be rendered nugatory by enforcement, and public interest favoured general deterrence by compliance with the publication order. The costs order was not stayed as the prospects of overturning it were remote and no quantifiable prejudice was established. The publication order was not stayed as its character did not constitute an order to pay money as a penalty under r 15, reputational harm was already inflicted, and inclusion...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 August 2013
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Application for Stay of Orders Pending Appeal
Outcome
Application for stay dismissed
Legal Topics
['stay of Orders' 'costs Orders' 'publication Orders' 'appeals in Summary Criminal Matters']
['practice and Procedure' 'criminal Law' 'environmental Law'] ['stay of Orders' 'costs Orders' 'publication Orders' 'appeals in Summary Criminal Matters']

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

Interlocutory Application / Application for Stay of Orders Pending Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court has power to grant a temporary stay of costs and publication orders pending appeal' 'Whether special or exceptional circumstances are needed for a stay in summary criminal matters' "Whether publication order is part of 'sentence' under Criminal Appeal Act 1912"]

Ratio Decidendi

The application for stay was dismissed as the Court found no proper basis for granting a stay under the Alexander discretion: Mr Harris had agreed to costs and publication orders, reputational harm had already occurred, the Court was not persuaded that any appeal would be rendered nugatory by enforcement, and public interest favoured general deterrence by compliance with the publication order. The costs order was not stayed as the prospects of overturning it were remote and no quantifiable prejudice was established. The publication order was not stayed as its character did not constitute an order to pay money as a penalty under r 15, reputational harm was already inflicted, and inclusion...

Court Disposition

Application for stay dismissed

Orders

  • ["Defendant's application is dismissed" "Defendant to pay prosecutor's costs of the application, excluding costs of 22 August 2013"]