DD v AA; DD v Lewis; DD v PP
Case
•
[2023] NSWCA 140
•22 June 2023
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
DD v AA; DD v Lewis; DD v PP [2023] NSWCA 140
[2023] NSWCA 140
22 June 2023
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the matters of *DD v AA*, *DD v Lewis*, and *DD v PP*, the appellant, DD, sought various orders including an adjournment, the appointment of a tutor, a stay of proceedings, leave to adduce fresh evidence, leave to amend the notice of appeal, and opposed a motion for dismissal. The respondents, AA, Lewis, and PP, sought to have the appeals dismissed and sought security for their costs. The applications were heard by Griffiths AJA in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.
The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the appellant had established sufficient grounds for an adjournment, whether the requirements for appointing a tutor had been met, whether a stay of proceedings was warranted, whether fresh evidence should be permitted, whether the notice of appeal could be amended, and whether the appeals should be dismissed. Crucially, the Court also had to determine if special circumstances existed to justify an order for security for costs, given the appellant's previous appeal had been dismissed for failure to provide security.
Griffiths AJA dismissed the applications for adjournment, tutor, and stay, finding that the medical evidence provided was insufficient and that the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules requirements had not been met. The Court also dismissed the application to amend the notice of appeal. While the motions for fresh evidence and dismissal were adjourned to the hearing of the appeal, the Court ordered the appellant to provide security for the respondents' costs, in the amount of $20,000 for *DD v AA* and *DD v Lewis*, and $32,000 for *DD v PP*. The Court reasoned that there was no suggestion that the appeals would be rendered nugatory by an order for security, and that the appellant had not demonstrated that such an order would stultify the proceedings, particularly in light of a prior appeal being dismissed for non-compliance with a security for costs order. Proceedings were stayed until the security was provided, with liberty to the respondents to apply for dismissal if the security was not furnished by the specified date.
The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the appellant had established sufficient grounds for an adjournment, whether the requirements for appointing a tutor had been met, whether a stay of proceedings was warranted, whether fresh evidence should be permitted, whether the notice of appeal could be amended, and whether the appeals should be dismissed. Crucially, the Court also had to determine if special circumstances existed to justify an order for security for costs, given the appellant's previous appeal had been dismissed for failure to provide security.
Griffiths AJA dismissed the applications for adjournment, tutor, and stay, finding that the medical evidence provided was insufficient and that the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules requirements had not been met. The Court also dismissed the application to amend the notice of appeal. While the motions for fresh evidence and dismissal were adjourned to the hearing of the appeal, the Court ordered the appellant to provide security for the respondents' costs, in the amount of $20,000 for *DD v AA* and *DD v Lewis*, and $32,000 for *DD v PP*. The Court reasoned that there was no suggestion that the appeals would be rendered nugatory by an order for security, and that the appellant had not demonstrated that such an order would stultify the proceedings, particularly in light of a prior appeal being dismissed for non-compliance with a security for costs order. Proceedings were stayed until the security was provided, with liberty to the respondents to apply for dismissal if the security was not furnished by the specified date.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Costs
-
Stay of Proceedings
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
AA v PD (No 2) [2023] NSWSC 945
Cases Citing This Decision
6
Doyle v AA; Doyle v Lewis; Doyle v Pp (No 3)
[2023] NSWCA 281
DD v AA; DD v Lewis; DD v Pp (No 2)
[2023] NSWCA 260
Sowmi v Master Electrical Services Pty Ltd
[2024] NSWSC 176
Cases Cited
24
Statutory Material Cited
7
Kalifair Pty Ltd v Digi-Tech (Australia) Ltd
[2002] NSWCA 383
Kalifair Pty Ltd v Digi-Tech (Australia) Ltd
[2002] NSWCA 383
Brown v King
[2022] NSWCA 75