Miraki & Anor v El-Cheikh

MIRAKI & ANOR
v
EL-CHEIKH & ANOR
[2022] HCASL 40
S194/2021

This application for special leave to appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Bathurst CJ, Basten JA and Emmett AJA) raises no question of general principle, and has insufficient prospects of success, to warrant the grant of special leave to appeal. It is also not otherwise in the interests of justice to grant special leave to appeal. The applicants require an extension of time, but it would be futile to grant the extension which is sought.
Pursuant to r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application with costs.

M.M. Gordon J.J. Edelman

10 March 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicants, Miraki and another, sought special leave to appeal against a judgment of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, in a case involving El-Cheikh and another. The applicants were dissatisfied with the outcome of the Court of Appeal's decision and sought to appeal to the High Court. The case involved a complex dispute over property rights and the interpretation of a will.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether the application for special leave to appeal should be granted. The applicants argued that the Court of Appeal's decision contained errors of law and that the case had general principle importance. However, the High Court found that the application raised no question of general principle, and had insufficient prospects of success, to warrant the grant of special leave to appeal. The Court also found that it was not in the interests of justice to grant special leave to appeal.

The High Court found that the applicants required an extension of time, but that it would be futile to grant the extension which was sought. The Court noted that the applicants had failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay in lodging the application, and that the delay had caused significant prejudice to the respondents. The Court concluded that it would not be appropriate to grant the extension of time which was sought. The Court also directed the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application with costs.

In summary, the High Court dismissed the application for special leave to appeal and refused to grant an extension of time. The Court found that the application raised no question of general principle, and had insufficient prospects of success, to warrant the grant of special leave to appeal. The Court also found that it was not in the interests of justice to grant special leave to appeal, and that it would be futile to grant the extension of time which was sought. The applicants were ordered to pay the costs of the application.

Keep reading for free

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established