3 Sept 2010
The Court refused to entertain the informal, eleventh‑hour stay application because the prejudice to the judgment creditor and the Court's need to manage its docket outweighed any limited prejudice to the judgment debtor, particularly where the applicant was present, had prepared for cross‑examination, and no formal application had been filed.
10 May 2010
The Court exercised its discretion to grant an examination order under r 17.12 because inquiries into past distributions, bank records and transactions could reveal recoverable trust property or causes of action (subrogated rights/exoneration) that constitute means of satisfying the judgment; the examination scope can include historical transactions where they may produce assets, subject to limiting inquiries futile to recovery (eg bankrupt recipients).
7 Jul 2008
The ex parte r 621 application was refused because the debt was relatively small ($13,084.02), the creditor had not attempted the less intrusive r 620 process, and in those circumstances proceeding ex parte to a detailed r 621 examination was an improper exercise of the Court's discretion; leave to reapply was reserved subject to serving a r 620 notice.