Hrs v NKW

In this matter, the appellant Hrs appeals against a decision made by the Tribunal, which issued a warrant of possession for the residential premises where she resided. The respondent, NKW, is the party against whom the warrant was issued. The Tribunal had previously made an interim order suspending the operation of the warrant, and since then, neither party has filed any new material in relation to the stay application. The Tribunal is satisfied that there is a reasonable case to be argued by the appellant, and the court must determine whether the balance of convenience favours the grant of a stay.

The court was required to consider the principles governing the grant or refusal of a stay of proceedings in this case. The appellant argued that the balance of convenience favoured a stay, while the respondent contended that there were no grounds for a stay. The court had to weigh the competing interests of both parties and determine whether a stay was warranted in the circumstances. Additionally, the court had to consider the implications of the appellant filing a claim in a court of competent jurisdiction for orders to give effect to her interest in the subject property.

The court found that the balance of convenience favoured the grant of a stay. The appellant had demonstrated that she had a reasonable case to be argued, and the Tribunal was satisfied that there was a reasonable prospect of success on the merits of the appeal. The court also considered the potential prejudice to both parties if the stay was not granted, and found that the appellant's interest in the property outweighed the respondent's interest in enforcing the warrant of possession. The court ordered that the decision in the minor civil dispute be stayed until 4.00pm on 17 January 2023. The appellant was given the opportunity to file an affidavit exhibiting a claim brought in a court of competent jurisdiction for orders to give effect to her interest in the subject property, and if she did so, the issue of leave to appeal would be stayed pending the determination of those claims. If the appellant did not file such an affidavit, the further consideration of the application for the stay and for leave to appeal would be decided on the papers not before 17 January 2023.

The court ordered that the decision in the minor civil dispute be stayed until 4.00pm on 17 January 2023. The appellant was given the opportunity to file an affidavit exhibiting a claim brought in a court of competent jurisdiction for orders to give effect to her interest in the subject property. If the appellant filed such an affidavit, the issue of leave to appeal would be stayed pending the determination of those claims, and the parties were required to advise the Tribunal within 14 days of any final determination of those claims having been made. If the appellant did not file such an affidavit, the further consideration of the application for the stay and for leave to appeal would be decided on the papers not before 17 January 2023.