Denning v Jet Development Pty Ltd and Anor Summary

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Denning v Jet Development Pty Ltd & Anor [2006] QCA 536

PARTIES:

ROYALIN MARGARET DENNING
(respondent/applicant)
v
JET DEVELOPMENT PTY LTD ACN 107 913 762
(first applicant/first respondent)
FERNVALE PROJECT PTY LTD ACN 119 408 767
(second applicant/second respondent)

FILE NO/S:

Appeal No 10779 of 2006
SC No 4879 of 2006

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Application for Stay of Execution

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED EX TEMPORE ON:

12 December 2006

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

12 December 2006

JUDGE:

Keane JA

ORDER:

Upon the applicant giving the usual undertaking as to damages, the hearing of the application for stay is adjourned until 9.30am on Friday 15 December 2006.

The Court stays the orders of Justice Chesterman of 5 December 2006, including the order that the contract be completed on 12 December 2006, until 1 pm on Friday 15 December 2006 or further earlier order.

The Court directs that any further affidavits from the Second Respondents be filed and served on or before 1pm Thursday 14 December.

Costs of today's appearance are reserved.

CATCHWORDS:

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - APPEAL - PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - QUEENSLAND - STAY OF PROCEEDINGS - stay of execution sought - respondents sought to advance submissions which necessitated gathering of further evidence - adjournment in order that that evidence might be gathered

COUNSEL:

P J Favell for the applicant
J W Peden for the respondents

SOLICITORS:

Morgan Conley for the applicant
Flower & Hart for the respondents

KEANE JA: The orders of the Court will be that upon the applicant giving the usual undertaking as to damages, the application for a stay be adjourned until 9.30 a.m. on Friday the 15th of December.

Until 1 p.m. on Friday the 15th of December or further earlier order, the order of Justice Chesterman of 5 December 2006, including in particular the order that the contract be completed on the 12th of December 2006 be stayed. Any further affidavit by the second respondent be filed and served on or before 1 p.m. on 14 December 2006. The costs of today's appearance be reserved.

‑‑‑‑‑

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Denning, the appellant, appealed against the decision of Justice Chesterman, who had ordered that the contract be completed on 12 December 2006. The respondent, Jet Development Pty Ltd, opposed the appeal. The appeal related to the stay of proceedings in an action concerning a contract for the sale of land. The appeal was heard in the Queensland Court of Appeal.

The legal issues before the Court included whether the respondents' submissions, which necessitated the gathering of further evidence, justified the stay of the proceedings. The respondents argued that they had not been given an adequate opportunity to respond to the appellant's submissions, and that further evidence needed to be gathered to properly respond to the appellant's claims. The Court had to determine whether the respondents' submissions were sufficient to warrant a stay of the proceedings, and if so, for how long.

The Court found that the respondents' submissions did warrant a stay of the proceedings, as the evidence they sought to present was critical to the disposition of the appeal. The Court granted the stay, allowing the respondents to gather the necessary evidence, and set a new hearing date. The Court noted that the stay was necessary to ensure that the appeal was heard fairly, and that the respondents had a reasonable opportunity to present their case. The Court also directed that any further affidavits from the respondents be filed by a specified date.

The Court stayed the orders of Justice Chesterman until 1 pm on Friday 15 December 2006 or further earlier order, and directed that any further affidavits from the respondents be filed and served on or before 1pm Thursday 14 December. The costs of the appearance were reserved.

Orders of the court

Upon the applicant giving the usual undertaking as to damages, the hearing of the application for stay is adjourned until 9.30am on Friday 15 December 2006.

The Court stays the orders of Justice Chesterman of 5 December 2006, including the order that the contract be completed on 12 December 2006, until 1 pm on Friday 15 December 2006 or further earlier order.

The Court directs that any further affidavits from the Second Respondents be filed and served on or before 1pm Thursday 14 December.

Costs of today's appearance are reserved.

Denning v Jet Development Pty Ltd and Anor

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established

CITATION:	Denning v Jet Development Pty Ltd & Anor [2006] QCA 536
PARTIES:	ROYALIN MARGARET DENNING (respondent/applicant) v JET DEVELOPMENT PTY LTD ACN 107 913 762 (first applicant/first respondent) FERNVALE PROJECT PTY LTD ACN 119 408 767 (second applicant/second respondent)
FILE NO/S:	Appeal No 10779 of 2006 SC No 4879 of 2006
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Application for Stay of Execution
ORIGINATING COURT:	Supreme Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED EX TEMPORE ON:	12 December 2006
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	12 December 2006
JUDGE:	Keane JA
ORDER:	Upon the applicant giving the usual undertaking as to damages, the hearing of the application for stay is adjourned until 9.30am on Friday 15 December 2006. The Court stays the orders of Justice Chesterman of 5 December 2006, including the order that the contract be completed on 12 December 2006, until 1 pm on Friday 15 December 2006 or further earlier order. The Court directs that any further affidavits from the Second Respondents be filed and served on or before 1pm Thursday 14 December. Costs of today's appearance are reserved.
CATCHWORDS:	APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - APPEAL - PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - QUEENSLAND - STAY OF PROCEEDINGS - stay of execution sought - respondents sought to advance submissions which necessitated gathering of further evidence - adjournment in order that that evidence might be gathered
COUNSEL:	P J Favell for the applicant J W Peden for the respondents
SOLICITORS:	Morgan Conley for the applicant Flower & Hart for the respondents