Astram Financial Services Pty Limited v Bank of Queensland Limited (No 2)

[2010] FCA 1508

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Astram Financial Services Pty Limited v Bank of Queensland Limited (No 2) [2010] FCA 1508

Citation:	Astram Financial Services Pty Limited v Bank of Queensland Limited (No 2) [2010] FCA 1508
Appeal from:	Astram Financial Services Pty Ltd v Bank of Queensland Ltd [2010] FCA 1010
Parties:	ASTRAM FINANCIAL SERVICES PTY LTD, LEICESTER DENIS RAMSEY and KIM SUE-ELLEN RAMSEY v BANK OF QUEENSLAND LTD
File number(s):	NSD 1346 of 2010
Judge:	EMMETT J
Date of judgment:	10 December 2010
Date of hearing:	10 December 2010
Place:	Sydney
Division:	GENERAL DIVISION
Category:	No catchwords
Number of paragraphs:	2
Counsel for the Appellants:	J.A. Loxton
Solicitor for the Appellants:	Mulally Mylott Solicitors
Counsel for the Respondents:	S. Couper QC and J. Gooley
Solicitor for the Respondents:	HWL Ebsworth Lawyers

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION	NSD 1346 of 2010

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

ASTRAM FINANCIAL SERVICES PTY LIMITED
First Appellant

LEICESTER DENIS RAMSEY
Second Appellant

KIM SUE-ELLEN RAMSEY
Third Appellant

AND:

BANK OF QUEENSLAND LIMITED
Respondent

JUDGE:	EMMETT J
DATE OF ORDER:	10 DECEMBER 2010
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The appeal be dismissed.

2.The appellants pay the costs of the respondent.

Note:Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
The text of entered orders can be located using Federal Law Search on the Court’s website.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
GENERAL DIVISION	NSD 1346 of 2010

ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN:

ASTRAM FINANCIAL SERVICES PTY LIMITED
First Appellant

LEICESTER DENIS RAMSEY
Second Appellant

KIM SUE-ELLEN RAMSEY
Third Appellant

AND:

BANK OF QUEENSLAND LIMITED
Respondent

JUDGE:	EMMETT J
DATE:	10 DECEMBER 2010
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. On 17 November 2010, the Court directed the appellants to provide security for the costs of the respondent and directed that the appeal be stayed pending the provision of security.  The Court also ordered that the notice of appeal of 11 October 2010 be struck out on the basis that it disclosed no viable ground of appeal.   The appellants were granted leave to file and serve a further notice of appeal no later than 8 December 2010.  No such further notice of appeal has been filed.

2. When the matter was called on again today for directions, counsel for the appellants indicated that they are not in a position to provide the security directed on 17 November 2010.  Nor have they been able to formulate any grounds of appeal that would indicate that there is any prospect of the appeal succeeding.  In those circumstances, the respondent has moved for summary dismissal of the appeal.  While that order is not consented to by the appellants, the appellants did not wish to advance any argument in opposition.  In the circumstances, I consider that it is appropriate that the appeal be dismissed.

I certify that the preceding two (2) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Emmett.

Associate:

Dated:        31 January 2011