Efektiv Pty Ltd v Jescal Nominees

Efektiv Pty Ltd sought a stay of possession orders made by VCAT against them. The respondent, Jescal Nominees, argued that Efektiv's application should be refused as there were no special circumstances warranting a stay. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The primary legal issue before the court was whether special circumstances existed under the relevant rules that would justify the court granting a stay of the VCAT orders. The court examined the criteria set out in Maher v Commonwealth Bank of Australia and the relevant procedural rules.

The court found that Efektiv had not demonstrated the presence of special circumstances as required by the relevant legal authorities and rules. It held that the applicant's prospects of success on appeal were not sufficiently compelling to warrant a stay of the VCAT orders. The court also noted that Efektiv had not provided any evidence of potential injustice if the stay was not granted. The court concluded that Efektiv had failed to meet the threshold for a stay under the rules. Therefore, the application was dismissed, and the possession orders were to remain in effect.