Al Haje v Elassaad (No 3) [2024] NSWSC 1191

Al Haje v Elassaad (No 3) [2024] NSWSC 1191

A stay is granted to allow the defendant to pursue an appeal, balanced by conditional payments to the plaintiff (half verdict sum, costs certificate) and stipulations on use of funds for the defendant (appeal/legal fees only), to achieve justice between the parties and not stultify the appeal.

Parties
Plaintiff: Wisam Al Haje; Defendant: Mohammad Elassaad
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application (stay Pending Appeal)
Outcome
Stay granted with conditional payments; mutual orders as to costs
Legal Topics
Stay of Proceedings, Pending Appeal, Payment of Verdict Sum, Costs, Payment of Legal Fees
Civil Procedure Stay of Proceedings Pending Appeal Payment of Verdict Sum Costs Payment of Legal Fees

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wisam Al Haje

Plaintiff

Mohammad Elassaad

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application (stay Pending Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant a stay of judgment and costs orders pending appeal
  2. 2 Conditions for any stay granted, including payment to plaintiff and provision of funds to defendant for appeal
  3. 3 Payment of previously ordered costs to plaintiff

Ratio Decidendi

A stay is granted to allow the defendant to pursue an appeal, balanced by conditional payments to the plaintiff (half verdict sum, costs certificate) and stipulations on use of funds for the defendant (appeal/legal fees only), to achieve justice between the parties and not stultify the appeal.

Court Disposition

Stay granted with conditional payments; mutual orders as to costs

Orders

  • The judgment and orders made on 6 June 2024 and 28 June 2024 respectively are stayed on condition that the plaintiff is paid $225,000.
  • The $225,000 referred to in the previous order is to be paid from the joint account held in the names of the plaintiff's solicitor and the defendant's solicitor.