Itek Graphix Pty Ltd v Elliott [No 2]
Case
•
[2002] NSWCA 274
•19 August 2002
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Itek Graphix Pty Ltd v Elliott [No 2] [2002] NSWCA 274
[2002] NSWCA 274
19 August 2002
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Supreme Court of New South Wales, constituted by Spigelman CJ, Sheller JA, and Ipp AJA, considered an application by Itek Graphix Pty Ltd (the appellant) to re-open an appeal and for a temporary stay of proceedings pending an application for special leave to appeal to the High Court. The dispute arose from a prior decision of the court, and the application concerned the repayment of funds paid by the appellant under a previous stay order.
The primary legal issues before the court were whether it had the power to re-open its own appeal decision and, if so, whether it should exercise that power. The court also had to determine whether to grant a temporary stay of proceedings to allow the appellant to pursue special leave to appeal to the High Court, and in relation to the repayment of funds previously paid under a stay order.
The court determined that it possessed the power to re-open an appeal in exceptional circumstances, citing the principles established in *Ullmann v Jowett*. However, the court found that the appellant had not demonstrated the necessary exceptional circumstances to justify re-opening the appeal. While acknowledging the appellant's intention to seek special leave to appeal to the High Court, the court concluded that this alone did not warrant a stay of the original orders or the re-opening of the appeal. The court also addressed the repayment of the $100,000 paid by the appellant, ordering its repayment with interest.
Consequently, the court ordered the respondent to repay the appellant the sum of $100,000, with interest calculated according to Schedule J of the Supreme Court Rules from 23 March 2001. The appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the application.
The primary legal issues before the court were whether it had the power to re-open its own appeal decision and, if so, whether it should exercise that power. The court also had to determine whether to grant a temporary stay of proceedings to allow the appellant to pursue special leave to appeal to the High Court, and in relation to the repayment of funds previously paid under a stay order.
The court determined that it possessed the power to re-open an appeal in exceptional circumstances, citing the principles established in *Ullmann v Jowett*. However, the court found that the appellant had not demonstrated the necessary exceptional circumstances to justify re-opening the appeal. While acknowledging the appellant's intention to seek special leave to appeal to the High Court, the court concluded that this alone did not warrant a stay of the original orders or the re-opening of the appeal. The court also addressed the repayment of the $100,000 paid by the appellant, ordering its repayment with interest.
Consequently, the court ordered the respondent to repay the appellant the sum of $100,000, with interest calculated according to Schedule J of the Supreme Court Rules from 23 March 2001. The appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the application.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Costs
-
Injunction
-
Stay of Proceedings
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
1
Statutory Material Cited
1
TCN Channel 9 Pty Ltd v Antoniadis (No 2)
[1999] NSWCA 104
TCN Channel 9 Pty Ltd v Antoniadis (No 2)
[1999] NSWCA 104
TCN Channel 9 Pty Ltd v Antoniadis (No 2)
[1999] NSWCA 104