MUNDY v LAMBERT INVESTMENT PTY LTD [1990] NSWCA 130

Execution of the writ of possession must be stayed to prevent the appeal being rendered nugatory and justice requires that the outcome depend upon the appeal, even if it causes prejudice to the opponent.

Parties: Claimant: Mundy; Opponent: Lambert Investment Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 22 January 1990
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Interlocutory Application
Outcome: stay granted
Legal Topics: Stay of Execution, Protected Premises, Appeal Procedure

Property Law Stay of Execution Protected Premises Appeal Procedure

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 3

Parties

Mundy

Claimant

Lambert Investment Pty Ltd

Opponent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

1 Whether execution of the writ of possession should be stayed pending appeal
2 Whether premises were a dwelling house in the course of erection on 16 December 1954 under applicable legislation

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

stay granted

Orders

Execution of the writ of possession issued by the opponent in respect of 10 Tara Street, Sylvania, be stayed until determination of the claimant's appeal, conditioned on claimant paying occupation fee at $140 per month until vacation of premises.
Costs of the application to be costs in the appeal.