Leybourne v Habkouk

The appeal concerned an application for leave to appeal from an order of the primary judge that permanently stayed proceedings. The applicant had sought to set aside a consent judgment, but this application was dismissed. The applicant had subsequently commenced new proceedings that raised substantially the same claims as those covered by the consent judgment. The central question before the Court of Appeal was whether the permanent stay order was a final or interlocutory order, which in turn determined whether leave to appeal was required.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether an appeal from a permanent stay order, granted after an application to set aside a consent judgment was dismissed, required leave. This involved considering the nature of the permanent stay order as either final or interlocutory for the purposes of appeal.

McColl and Meagher JJA granted leave to appeal, finding that the permanent stay order was a final order. The Court directed the applicant to file and serve a notice of appeal confined to specific grounds within 14 days. The costs of the application for leave to appeal and competency notices of motion were reserved. The matter was stood over for further consideration regarding the preparation of appeal books to minimise costs.