Penson v Titan National Pty Limited (No 2) [2015] NSWCA 120

Penson v Titan National Pty Limited (No 2) [2015] NSWCA 120

The applicant failed to establish that there was any jurisdiction to appeal from interlocutory or costs orders made in statutory appeal proceedings from a costs review panel, failed to show a serious issue to be tried in applications otherwise subject to leave, and gave no sufficient grounds for stay or extension of time. The Court declined to grant a stay of the decisions pending leave to appeal and dismissed the notice of motion.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 May 2015
Procedural Posture
Application for Stay Pending Application for Leave to Appeal / Interlocutory Motion Determination
Outcome
Notice of motion for stay dismissed; stay of judgments pending application for leave to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
['appeals' 'stay of Judgment' 'costs Assessment' 'extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal']
['civil Procedure'] ['appeals' 'stay of Judgment' 'costs Assessment' 'extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal']

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 Stay Pending Application for Leave to Appeal / Interlocutory Motion Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a stay of various District Court orders should be granted pending the determination of an application for leave to appeal' 'Whether the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to hear an appeal from interlocutory and costs orders made in statutory appeal proceedings from a costs review panel' 'Whether the applicant has made out a proper basis for grant of stay or extension of time for leave to appeal']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to establish that there was any jurisdiction to appeal from interlocutory or costs orders made in statutory appeal proceedings from a costs review panel, failed to show a serious issue to be tried in applications otherwise subject to leave, and gave no sufficient grounds for stay or extension of time. The Court declined to grant a stay of the decisions pending leave to appeal and dismissed the notice of motion.

Court Disposition

Notice of motion for stay dismissed; stay of judgments pending application for leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • ['Notice of motion for stay dismissed.' 'No stay of District Court orders pending application for leave to appeal.']