Lewence Construction Pty Ltd v Southern Han Breakfast Point Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2015] NSWCA 150
•25 May 2015
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Lewence Construction Pty Ltd v Southern Han Breakfast Point Pty Ltd [2015] NSWCA 150
[2015] NSWCA 150
25 May 2015
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Lewence Construction Pty Ltd (the appellant) sought a stay of a court order pending the determination of its appeal against Southern Han Breakfast Point Pty Ltd (the respondent). The dispute concerned monies paid into court pursuant to a judgment arising from a claim under the *Building and Construction Industry Security of Payments Act 1999* (NSW).
The primary legal issue before Leeming JA was whether a stay of the order requiring payment of monies into court should be granted pending appeal. Specifically, the court considered whether exceptional circumstances were required to be shown when the underlying claim arose under the Security of Payments Act, and whether the appellant had demonstrated sufficient grounds for a stay in the absence of evidence of prejudice to the respondent and limited evidence of the respondent's financial circumstances.
Leeming JA determined that exceptional circumstances were not a prerequisite for a stay in this context. The court applied the general principles for granting a stay pending appeal, which involve considering the merits of the appeal and the balance of convenience. Given that the appeal was capable of being heard within a short timeframe and the appellant had provided an undertaking to prosecute the appeal with expedition, a stay was ordered.
The court ordered that the order requiring payment of monies into court be stayed until seven days after the determination of the appeal. Directions were also given regarding the filing and service of written submissions and the preparation of appeal books, with the appeal to be listed for hearing shortly thereafter. The costs of the notice of motion were reserved to be costs in the appeal.
The primary legal issue before Leeming JA was whether a stay of the order requiring payment of monies into court should be granted pending appeal. Specifically, the court considered whether exceptional circumstances were required to be shown when the underlying claim arose under the Security of Payments Act, and whether the appellant had demonstrated sufficient grounds for a stay in the absence of evidence of prejudice to the respondent and limited evidence of the respondent's financial circumstances.
Leeming JA determined that exceptional circumstances were not a prerequisite for a stay in this context. The court applied the general principles for granting a stay pending appeal, which involve considering the merits of the appeal and the balance of convenience. Given that the appeal was capable of being heard within a short timeframe and the appellant had provided an undertaking to prosecute the appeal with expedition, a stay was ordered.
The court ordered that the order requiring payment of monies into court be stayed until seven days after the determination of the appeal. Directions were also given regarding the filing and service of written submissions and the preparation of appeal books, with the appeal to be listed for hearing shortly thereafter. The costs of the notice of motion were reserved to be costs in the appeal.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Procedure
-
Contract Law
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Stay of Proceedings
-
Costs
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Titus v Eddington [2019] NSWCATCD 93
Cases Citing This Decision
3
MTR Corporation (Sydney) NRT Pty Ltd v Thales Australia Ltd
[2020] NSWCA 226
Decon Australia Pty Limited v TFM Epping Land Pty Limited (No 2)
[2020] NSWSC 312
Titus v Eddington
[2019] NSWCATCD 93
Cases Cited
10
Statutory Material Cited
2
Southern Han Breakfast Point Pty Ltd v Lewence Construction Pty Ltd
[2015] NSWSC 502
Vaughan v Dawson
[2008] NSWCA 169
Adeels Palace Pty Ltd v Moubarak
[2009] NSWCA 130