Lambourne v Baker (No 9) - [2025] NSWCA 53

Court of Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Lambourne v Baker (No 9) [2025] NSWCA 53
Hearing dates: 27 March 2025
Date of orders: 27 March 2025
Decision date: 28 March 2025
Before: Adamson JA, Ball JA, Griffiths AJA
Decision:
Application for stay refused.

Catchwords:
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – urgent application for stay pending as yet unfiled application for special leave to appeal to the High Court – application of Burgundy Royale test – no substantial prospect of special leave being granted – stay refused

Legislation Cited:
Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), s 46(4)

Cases Cited:
123 259 932 Pty Ltd v Cessnock City Council (No 2) [2023] NSWCA 89
Lambourne v Baker (No 4) [2024] NSWCA 132
Lambourne v Baker (No 6) [2025] NSWCA 45
Piety Developments Pty Ltd v Cumberland City Council (No 2) [2024] NSWCA 196

Category: Procedural rulings
Parties: Marc Alan Lambourne (First Applicant)
Glenn Craig Pollett (Second Applicant)
Punters Show Pty Ltd (Third Applicant)
Dallas Matthew Baker (First Respondent)
Todd Cameron Buckingham (Second Respondent)
BetMakers Technology Group Limited (Third Respondent)
12 Follow Pty Limited (Fourth Respondent)
Operis Momentus Pty Limited (Fifth Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:

MA Lambourne (Applicants) (Self represented)
AP Cheshire SC (Respondents)

Solicitors:
Vintage Law (Respondents)

File Number(s): 2019/407870
Publication restriction: Nil
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

Supreme Court

Jurisdiction:

Court of Appeal

Citation:

[2025] NSWCA 45

Date of Decision:

27 March 2025

Before:

Adamson JA, Ball JA, Griffiths AJA

File Number(s):

2019/407870

JUDGMENT

THE COURT: On 27 March 2025, the Court delivered a judgment in this matter: Lambourne v Baker (No 6) [2025] NSWCA 45 (Lambourne v Baker (No 6)). By that judgment, the Court dismissed an application under s 46(4) of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) to review a decision of Price AJA by which his Honour, among other things, refused an application made under the slip rule to amend orders previously made by Basten AJA in Lambourne v Baker (No 4) [2024] NSWCA 132 that of an amount of $210,249 that had been paid into Court on 21 March 2022 by the respondents, $186,214.86 be paid to the respondents and the balance (including any interest) be paid to the third applicant, Punters Show Pty Ltd.
At the time judgment was delivered, Mr Lambourne, who appeared for the applicants, made an oral application for a stay. The Court refused that application and said it would deliver reasons later. These are those reasons. These reasons are to be read together with the judgment in Lambourne v Baker (No 6) and adopt the same abbreviations as used in that judgment.
Mr Lambourne, who appeared for the applicants, advanced two reasons for a stay. First, he submitted that the applicants were considering making further applications to the Court and the stay should be granted in order to permit them to do so. Second, he submitted that a stay should be granted in aid of an application for special leave to appeal to the High Court.
Mr Lambourne…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Lambourne v Baker (No 9)

Details

AGLC: Lambourne v Baker (No 9) [2025] NSWCA 53
Case: [2025] NSWCA 53
Decision Date: 28 March 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The parties in this matter were Lambourne (the applicant) and Baker (the respondent). The dispute concerned an urgent application for a stay of proceedings pending the filing of an application for special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia. The application was heard by Adamson and Ball JJA, and Griffiths AJA.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether to grant a stay of proceedings. This required the court to consider the test established in *Burgundy Royale Investments Pty Ltd v Westpac Banking Corporation* (1987) 10 NSWLR 607, which dictates that a stay will only be granted if there is a substantial prospect that special leave to appeal will be granted by the High Court.

The court's reasoning focused on the application of the *Burgundy Royale* test. It was determined that the applicant had not demonstrated a substantial prospect of success in obtaining special leave to appeal to the High Court. Consequently, the threshold for granting a stay was not met.

The application for a stay was refused.

Orders

Orders of the court

Application for stay refused.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Medium Neutral Citation:	Lambourne v Baker (No 9) [2025] NSWCA 53
Hearing dates:	27 March 2025
Date of orders:	27 March 2025
Decision date:	28 March 2025
Before:	Adamson JA, Ball JA, Griffiths AJA
Decision:	Application for stay refused.
Catchwords:	PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – urgent application for stay pending as yet unfiled application for special leave to appeal to the High Court – application of Burgundy Royale test – no substantial prospect of special leave being granted – stay refused
Legislation Cited:	Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), s 46(4)
Cases Cited:	123 259 932 Pty Ltd v Cessnock City Council (No 2) [2023] NSWCA 89 Lambourne v Baker (No 4) [2024] NSWCA 132 Lambourne v Baker (No 6) [2025] NSWCA 45 Piety Developments Pty Ltd v Cumberland City Council (No 2) [2024] NSWCA 196
Category:	Procedural rulings
Parties:	Marc Alan Lambourne (First Applicant) Glenn Craig Pollett (Second Applicant) Punters Show Pty Ltd (Third Applicant) Dallas Matthew Baker (First Respondent) Todd Cameron Buckingham (Second Respondent) BetMakers Technology Group Limited (Third Respondent) 12 Follow Pty Limited (Fourth Respondent) Operis Momentus Pty Limited (Fifth Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: MA Lambourne (Applicants) (Self represented) AP Cheshire SC (Respondents) Solicitors: Vintage Law (Respondents)
File Number(s):	2019/407870
Publication restriction:	Nil
Decision under appeal	Court or tribunal: Supreme Court Jurisdiction: Court of Appeal Citation: [2025] NSWCA 45 Date of Decision: 27 March 2025 Before: Adamson JA, Ball JA, Griffiths AJA File Number(s): 2019/407870