Court of Appeal
Supreme Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Michael Wilson & Partners v Emmott [2024] NSWCA 269 Hearing dates: 15 November 2024 Date of orders: 15 November 2024 Decision date: 15 November 2024 Before: Ward P; Griffiths AJA Decision: 1. The summons seeking leave to appeal filed 31 October 2024 is dismissed.
2. The applicant’s application for an extension of time to file the summons, as referred to in its outline of written submissions dated 7 November 2024, is also dismissed.
3. The applicant’s notice of motion filed 7 November 2024 is dismissed, with no order as to costs.
4. The applicant pay the respondent’s costs of the summons seeking leave to appeal filed 31 October 2024.
Catchwords: APPEALS — leave to appeal — interlocutory orders setting substantive matter down for hearing — whether applicants have identified a principle of general application or a question of public importance or any substantial injustice — where leave to appeal denied
Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), ss 56, 57, 58
Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), ss 46, 101
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), rr 36.15, 36.16, 36.17, 51.54
Cases Cited: Adam P. Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd v Philip Morris Inc (1981) 148 CLR 170; [1981] HCA 39
Avery v Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages; Avery v State of NSW (Attorney-General’s Department) (2010) 79 NSWLR 354; [2010] NSWCA 72
Bizuneh v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (2003) 128 FCR 353; [2003] FCAFC 42
Emmott v Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd [2022] HCASL 142
Hans Pet Constructions Pty Limited v Cassar [2009] NSWCA 230
House v R (1936) 55 CLR 499
Khoury v Coffey Projects (Australia) Pty Ltd [2015] NSWCA 371
Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd as the assignee of Robert Colin Nicholls & Temujin International Limited (atf Temujin International (trading) Trust & Temujin Services Limited v Emmott (No 5) [2024] NSWSC 1127
Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Emmott (2021) 396 ALR 497; [2021] NSWCA 315
Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Emmott [2019] NSWSC 218
Mohareb v Local Court of New South Wales [2024] NSWCA 235
Mohareb v Manly Local Court [2024] NSWCA 233
Nicholls v Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd (No 2) [2013] NSWCA 141
PPK Willoughby Pty Ltd v Baird [2019] NSWCA 48
Press v iSAM Securities (UK) Ltd [2024] NSWCA 260
Re the Will of FB Gilbert (1946) 46 SR (NSW) 318
Satchithanantham v National Australia Bank [2010] FCAFC 47
State Rail Authority of New South Wales v Phillips [2001] NSWCA 172
Texts Cited: Nil
Category: Principal judgment Parties: Michael Wilson & Partners Limited (Applicant)
John Forster Emmott (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
G Burton SC (Applicant)
J Baird (Respondent)
Michael Wilson & Partners, Limited (Applicant)
Duggan Legal (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2024/406800 Publication restriction: Nil Decision under appeal
- Court or tribunal:
- Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction:
- Equity
- Date of Decision:
- 26 August 2024
- Before:
- Ball J
- File Number(s):
- 2016/00034380
JUDGMENT
-
The applicant seeks leave to appeal from an…
Continue reading Michael Wilson & Partners v Emmott
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Michael Wilson & Partners v Emmott [2024] NSWCA 269
- Case
- [2024] NSWCA 269
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the applicants had satisfied the criteria for granting leave to appeal an interlocutory order. Specifically, the court had to determine if the applicants had demonstrated that the appeal involved a question of general principle, a question of public importance, or would occasion substantial injustice to the applicants if leave were refused.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the summons seeking leave to appeal, finding that the applicants had not identified a principle of general application or a question of public importance, nor had they established that a substantial injustice would occur. Consequently, the application for an extension of time to file the summons and the notice of motion were also dismissed. The court ordered that the applicant pay the respondent's costs of the summons seeking leave to appeal, with no order as to costs for the notice of motion.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The summons seeking leave to appeal filed 31 October 2024 is dismissed.
2. The applicant’s application for an extension of time to file the summons, as referred to in its outline of written submissions dated 7 November 2024, is also dismissed.
3. The applicant’s notice of motion filed 7 November 2024 is dismissed, with no order as to costs.
4. The applicant pay the respondent’s costs of the summons seeking leave to appeal filed 31 October 2024.
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.