Diakou Nominees Pty Ltd v Gouger Street Pty Ltd; Gouger Street Pty Ltd v Diakou Nominees Pty Ltd

[2017] SASCFC 127

SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA

(Full Court: Permission to Appeal in Private)

DIAKOU NOMINEES PTY LTD v GOUGER STREET PTY LTD & ORS; GOUGER STREET PTY LTD v DIAKOU NOMINEES PTY LTD

[2017] SASCFC 127

Judgment of The Full Court

(The Honourable Chief Justice Kourakis, The Honourable Justice Vanstone and The Honourable Justice Blue)

26 September 2017

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - APPEAL - GENERAL PRINCIPLES - RIGHT OF APPEAL - WHEN APPEAL LIES - FROM INTERLOCUTORY DECISIONS - LEAVE TO APPEAL

Permission to appeal is sought because although the judgment finally determines the substantive rights, interests and obligations of the parties, the decision was made on a preliminary question.

Held per Curiam, the matters raised by the applicant are arguable on their face, permission is granted to the extent that is required.

DIAKOU NOMINEES PTY LTD v GOUGER STREET PTY LTD & ORS; GOUGER STREET PTY LTD v DIAKOU NOMINEES PTY LTD
[2017] SASCFC 127

Full Court:      Kourakis CJ, Vanstone and Blue JJ

THE COURT:            Permission to appeal in this matter is sought because, although the judgment finally determines the application of the Act to the contract and, therefore, the substantive rights and interests and obligations of the parties, the decision was made on the determination of a preliminary question.  It is unnecessary to decide whether or not permission is required.  The matters raised by the applicant appear on their face to be arguable.  Given that it was considered appropriate to determine the question as a preliminary issue, there is no reason not to grant permission.  To the extent that it is required, permission is granted.