Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Schroder
[2000] QCA 7
•3/02/2000
[2000] QCA 7
COURT OF APPEAL
PINCUS JA
McPHERSON JA
THOMAS J
No 9283 of 1999
EQUUSCORP PTY LTD (FORMERLY EQUUS
| FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD) | Respondent (Plaintiff) |
| and | |
| RURAL FINANCE PTY LTD - RECEIVERS | |
| & MANAGERS APPOINTED | |
| (IN LIQUIDATION) | Respondent (Plaintiff) |
| and | |
| KENNETH GORDON SCHRODER | Appellant (Defendant) |
| BRISBANE ..DATE 03/02/2000 0302000 T14/JAP22 M/T COA5/2000 |
PINCUS JA: In this application for leave to appeal and for a
stay, the Court having considered the matter is prepared to accept
the undertaking which is proffered by Mr Couper QC, marked "A",
initialled and dated by me and which will be placed with the
papers.
I should, for myself, say that in my view the principal argument advanced by Mr Crowe was that the order made below was oppressive as it involved too much difficulty in compliance. The undertaking which is given appears to me to a significant extent to reduce the impact of that submission at least sufficiently to make it undesirable to hold up the proceedings further.
Nevertheless, of course, Mr Crone is at liberty to pursue the appeal which has been instituted if so advised. The order I propose then is that the application for leave to appeal and the application for a stay both be dismissed on the undertaking given by Mr Couper QC on behalf of the respondent/plaintiffs in the form marked "A" initialled and dated by me and placed with the papers and I would propose that the parties be asked to address the Court on the question of costs.
...
PINCUS JA: Gentlemen, it has been pointed out to me that I
referred to "the appeal". I intended to say, "the appeal, if
any". We are not, of course, determining whether there is any
right of appeal.
0302000 T14/JAP22 M/T COA5/2000
As to costs the Court has determined that the respondents should have half their costs of the appeal and it will be so ordered. That is, on the undertaking which I have referred to being given, the applications for a stay and the leave to appeal are refused and the order for costs is as I have indicated.
-----
0
0
0