Miao v Michell [2018] FCA 2000

Miao v Michell [2018] FCA 2000

The application for extension of time was dismissed as the appeal regarding the refusal of injunctive relief was futile due to the property having been sold, and no merit existed in the grounds for appeal. Even if leave were granted, relief sought could not be given because the contract in question was no longer extant.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Decision
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
['injunction' 'annulment of Bankruptcy' 'extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Orders']
['bankruptcy and Insolvency'] ['injunction' 'annulment of Bankruptcy' 'extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Orders']

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

Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the application for extension of time to seek leave to appeal should be granted' 'Whether leave to appeal from interlocutory decision should be granted' 'Whether the appeal is futile due to completion of sale of property' 'Whether interim injunction should have been granted']

Ratio Decidendi

The application for extension of time was dismissed as the appeal regarding the refusal of injunctive relief was futile due to the property having been sold, and no merit existed in the grounds for appeal. Even if leave were granted, relief sought could not be given because the contract in question was no longer extant.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • ['The application for an extension of time be dismissed with costs as agreed or as assessed.']