ALS 131 Pty Ltd v Rahme

ALS 131 Pty Ltd, the appellant, brought an action against its tenant, Mr. Rahme, to recover possession of premises. The dispute was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, with the Court of Appeal presiding over the matter. The primary issue before the court was whether the appeal from an earlier interlocutory order that stayed the writ of possession was to be dismissed due to it not involving a question of principle.

The court considered whether the appellant had a right to appeal from an interlocutory order that stayed the writ of possession, particularly if the appeal did not involve a question of principle. The court noted that ordinarily, interlocutory orders are not appealable unless there is a question of principle involved. However, in this case, the court found that the appeal was not intended to address a question of principle but rather to challenge the interlocutory order on other grounds. The court emphasised that interlocutory orders that stay writs of possession are not typically appealable unless there is a significant legal issue at stake.

The court concluded that the appeal should be dismissed as it did not involve a question of principle. The interlocutory order was found to be within the discretion of the trial judge and did not warrant further review on appeal. The court held that the appeal was not an appropriate vehicle for challenging the interlocutory order and that the matter should proceed in the lower court.

No further orders were made by the court of appeal, and the appeal was dismissed. The court's decision clarified the limited circumstances under which interlocutory orders in possession proceedings may be appealed, reinforcing the importance of the principle that such orders are generally not appealable unless there is a significant legal issue involved.