BERSENEV INVESTMENTS PTY LTD v NARILU PTY LTD [1989] NSWCA 20

BERSENEV INVESTMENTS PTY LTD v NARILU PTY LTD [1989] NSWCA 20

The appropriate exercise of the Court's discretion is to grant a stay of execution upon the same conditions fixed by the trial judge, namely security in the sum of $50,000, as this adequately protects the respondent without preventing the claimant from proceeding with the appeal.

Parties
Claimant: Bersenev Investments Pty Ltd; Opponent: Narilu Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 March 1989
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Outcome
Stay of execution granted on condition.
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Security for Judgment, Bailment
Practice and Procedure Stay of Execution Security for Judgment Bailment

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 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bersenev Investments Pty Ltd

Claimant

Narilu Pty Ltd

Opponent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Should execution of the District Court judgment be stayed pending appeal?
  2. 2 What conditions are appropriate for the stay to adequately protect the respondent?

Ratio Decidendi

The appropriate exercise of the Court's discretion is to grant a stay of execution upon the same conditions fixed by the trial judge, namely security in the sum of $50,000, as this adequately protects the respondent without preventing the claimant from proceeding with the appeal.

Court Disposition

Stay of execution granted on condition.

Orders

  • Stay the execution of the judgment of Judge Phelan dated 16 September 1988 on condition that within twenty-eight days of this date the claimant lodge security in the sum of $50,000 by cheque or bank guarantee acceptable to the Registrar of the Court of Appeal.
  • Costs of the motion, opponent's costs in the appeal.