Stanizzo v Badarne & Anor [2018] NSWSC 475

Stanizzo v Badarne & Anor [2018] NSWSC 475

The plaintiff’s evidence failed to establish a good arguable case, risk of asset dissipation, or the likelihood that respondents would abscond. The requirements for freezing orders against third parties under r 25.14(5) were not adequately addressed. The unexplained delay further militated against granting the order. The interim freezing order was refused.

Parties
Plaintiff: Vincent Francis Stanizzo; Defendant: Muhammad Badarne
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Proceedings / Application for Interim Freezing Order
Outcome
Interim freezing order refused
Legal Topics
Freezing Orders, Malicious Prosecution, Asset Dissipation, Interim Remedies
Practice and Procedure Freezing Orders Malicious Prosecution Asset Dissipation Interim Remedies

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vincent Francis Stanizzo

Plaintiff

Muhammad Badarne

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Proceedings / Application for Interim Freezing Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a freezing order under Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) 25.11 and 25.14 against the defendant and a third party
  2. 2 Whether there is sufficient evidence of a good arguable case
  3. 3 Whether there is sufficient evidence of risk of asset dissipation or absconding

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff’s evidence failed to establish a good arguable case, risk of asset dissipation, or the likelihood that respondents would abscond. The requirements for freezing orders against third parties under r 25.14(5) were not adequately addressed. The unexplained delay further militated against granting the order. The interim freezing order was refused.

Court Disposition

Interim freezing order refused

Orders

  • The first and second respondents are to file and serve any affidavit evidence upon which they propose to rely by 5pm on 27 April 2018.
  • The plaintiff is to file any affidavit evidence in reply by 5pm on 4 May 2018.