Stergiou v Phelps [1999] FCA 1563

Stergiou v Phelps [1999] FCA 1563

The application for extension of time was refused because the applicants failed to satisfactorily explain their delay and the Statement of Claim did not disclose an arguable cause of action.

Parties
Applicant: Stanley Stergiou; Applicant: Ekaterine Stergiou; Respondent: Michael James Phelps; Respondent: Margaret Elizabeth Reid; Respondent: Michael John Deasey trading as Phelps Reid
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 November 1999
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Determination of Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application for extension of time dismissed; costs awarded to respondents.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Summary Judgment, Pleadings, Appeal Process
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Summary Judgment Pleadings Appeal Process

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stanley Stergiou

Applicant

Ekaterine Stergiou

Applicant

Michael James Phelps

Respondent

Margaret Elizabeth Reid

Respondent

Michael John Deasey trading as Phelps Reid

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Determination of Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants should be granted an extension of time to appeal
  2. 2 Whether the Statement of Claim disclosed a cause of action

Ratio Decidendi

The application for extension of time was refused because the applicants failed to satisfactorily explain their delay and the Statement of Claim did not disclose an arguable cause of action.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time dismissed; costs awarded to respondents.

Orders

  • The application for extension of time be dismissed.
  • The applicants pay the costs of the respondents.