Stockham v WLD Practice Holdings Pty Limited [2021] NSWCA 280

Stockham v WLD Practice Holdings Pty Limited [2021] NSWCA 280

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicants' further challenges to the Valuation were precluded by the Anshun principle, the contention that the second applicant was not a "Bad Leaver" was unarguable because the applicants had affirmed and invoked the Unitholders Agreement valuation process, and the order extending the freezing order had a sufficient basis as security for the respondent's costs and had no reasonable prospect of successful appeal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 November 2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Summons Seeking Leave to Appeal From Judgments of Sackar J in the Equity Division of the Supreme Court of New South Wales
Outcome
Summons seeking leave to appeal dismissed, with costs.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'separate Questions' 'anshun Estoppel' 'res Judicata' 'freezing Order' 'summary Judgment' 'judicial Advice' 'unitholders Agreement Valuation Costs']
['appeals' 'equity' 'civil Procedure' 'trusts'] ['leave to Appeal' 'separate Questions' 'anshun Estoppel' 'res Judicata' 'freezing Order' 'summary Judgment' 'judicial Advice' 'unitholders Agreement Valuation Costs']

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal / Summons Seeking Leave to Appeal From Judgments of Sackar J in the Equity Division of the Supreme Court of New South Wales

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicants should be permitted to raise further challenges to the validity of the Valuation after separate questions had been answered adversely to them and the cross-summons dismissed.' 'Whether the Points of Defence and Third Cross-Summons challenging the Valuation were precluded by res judicata or the principle in Port of Melbourne Authority v Anshun Pty Ltd.' 'Whether the second applicant had an arguable answer to liability for the costs of the Valuation on the basis that it was not a "Bad Leaver".' 'Whether there was a sufficient basis to extend the freezing order relating to money provided as security.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicants' further challenges to the Valuation were precluded by the Anshun principle, the contention that the second applicant was not a "Bad Leaver" was unarguable because the applicants had affirmed and invoked the Unitholders Agreement valuation process, and the order extending the freezing order had a sufficient basis as security for the respondent's costs and had no reasonable prospect of successful appeal.

Court Disposition

Summons seeking leave to appeal dismissed, with costs.

Orders

  • ['Summons seeking leave to appeal dismissed, with costs.' 'Leave to tender letters dated 25 October 2021 and 1 November 2021 rejected.']