Mohareb v Jankulovski

[2013] NSWCA 462

Court of Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

Mohareb v Jankulovski [2013] NSWCA 462

Hearing dates:

11 December 2013

Decision date:

11 December 2013

Before:

Basten JA;
Meagher JA

Decision:

(1) Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

(2) Applicant pay the respondents' costs of the application.

[Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.]

Catchwords:

APPEAL - application for leave to appeal -order dismissing application for specific performance of alleged settlement agreement and order that security for costs be provided - no seriously arguable error demonstrated in relation to conclusion that no binding settlement agreement - no substantial injustice shown in relation to order for security

Legislation Cited:

Civil Procedure Act 2005, s 73
Supreme Court Act 1970, s 101

Cases Cited:

ABC v XIVth Commonwealth Games Ltd (1988) 18 NSWLR 540
Be Financial Pty Ltd v Das [2012] NSWCA 164
Ermogenous v Greek Orthodox Community of SA Inc [2002] HCA 8; 209 CLR 95
Grave v Blazevic Holdings Pty Ltd [2012] NSWCA 329
Helmoss Enterprises Pty Ltd v Jaylor Pty Ltd [2005] NSWCA 235
Masters v Cameron [1954] HCA 72; 91 CLR 353
Rajski v Computer Manufacture & Design Pty Ltd [1983] 2 NSWLR 122

Category:

Principal judgment

Parties:

Nader Mohareb (Applicant)
Emil Jankulovski (First Respondent)
Emil & Sons Pty Ltd t/as Inducta Engineering (Second Respondent)

Representation:

In person (Applicant)
M Dulhunty (Respondents)

File Number(s):

2013/218633

 Decision under appeal 

Jurisdiction:

9111

Citation:

Mohareb v Jankulovski [2013] NSWSC 850

Date of Decision:

2013-06-27 00:00:00

Before:

Harrison AsJ

File Number(s):

2012/68684

Judgment

1. THE COURT: On 11 December 2013, at the conclusion of argument, the Court ordered that the applicant's (Mr Mohareb's) summons seeking leave to appeal from two orders of the primary judge (Harrison AsJ) made on 27 June 2013 be dismissed with costs. The following are our reasons for making those orders.

1. The applicant is a structural engineering consultant. He has brought proceedings alleging defamation and misleading or deceptive conduct against the first respondent (Mr Jankulovski) and the second respondent, a company controlled by the first respondent which provides computer software for use by engineers in the construction industry. Those claims are made as a result of two letters written by Mr Jankulovski on behalf of the second respondent to a client of Mr Mohareb which questioned the latter's professional competence as a structural engineer.

1. Since those proceedings were commenced in 2012 there have been four attempts to settle them. Mr Mohareb maintains that his acceptance of a fourth offer, made to him by Mr Jankulovski on 4 February 2013, gave rise to a binding agreement to bring them to…