Court of Appeal
Supreme Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Partington v Pacific Link Community Housing Ltd [2013] NSWCA 67 Hearing dates: 25 March 2013 Decision date: 25 March 2013 Before: Ward JA Decision: Appellant's application to be reinstated in premises from which he was evicted, pending the hearing of his appeal, dismissed. Security for costs ordered. Orders made as to persons to whom, and manner in which, correspondence or communications in relation to these proceedings should be made. Costs of motions ordered in favour of respondent.
[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: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - security for costs - application for orders as to communications between parties
BIAS - application for disqualification on grounds of bias
EQUITY - interlocutory mandatory injunction sought for reinstatement to premises pending appealLegislation Cited: Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Act 2001 (NSW)
Residential Tenancies Act 1987 (NSW)
Residential Tenancies Act 2010 (NSW)
Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW)
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW)Cases Cited: Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy [2000] HCA 63; (2000) 205 CLR 337
House v R (1936) 55 CLR 499
Hunt v Allied Bakeries Ltd [1956] 3 All ER 513
King Investment Solutions Pty Ltd v Hussain [2009] NSWSC 1076
Lall v 53-55 Hall Street Pty Ltd [1978] 1 NSWLR 310
Levy v Bablis [2011] NSWCA 411
Little v Victoria [1998] 4 VR 596
Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Nicholls & Ors [2011] HCA 48; (2011) 282 ALR 685
Porter v Gordian Runoff Limited [2004] NSWCA 171
Preston v Harbour Pacific Underwriting Management Pty Limited [2007] NSWCA 247
Re Luck [2003] HCA 70; [2003] 203 ALR 1
Tampion v Anderson [1973] 3 ALR 414
Transglobal Capital Pty Limited v Yolarno Pty Limited [2004] NSWCA 136; [2004] 60 NSWLR 143
Weldon v Maples Teesdale & Co [1887] 20 QBD 331Category: Interlocutory applications Parties: Ricky Partington (Appellant)
Pacific Link Community Housing Ltd (First Respondent)
Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal (Second Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Appellant self-represented
A Hourigan (First Respondent)
K Sato (Second Respondent)
Solicitors:
Chris Ryan Legal (First Respondent)
I V Knight, Crown Solicitor (Second Respondent)
File Number(s): 12/390042 Decision under appeal
- Date of Decision:
- 2012-12-14 00:00:00
- Before:
- Robison DCJ
- File Number(s):
- 12/539351
Judgment (ex tempore)
HER HONOUR: Before me in the referrals list today are two applications in this matter. There is an application by the first respondent, Pacific Link Housing Limited, by amended notice of motion dated 4 March 2013 for orders falling within three main categories. The first is an order for security for costs pursuant to r 51.50 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Partington v Pacific Link Community Housing Ltd and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2013] NSWCA 67
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the appellant was entitled to an interlocutory mandatory injunction for his reinstatement to the premises, whether the respondent should be granted security for its costs, and what orders, if any, should be made regarding communications between the parties in relation to the proceedings. The appellant also raised grounds concerning bias, though the specific nature of these grounds is not detailed in the provided text.
Ward JA dismissed the appellant's application for reinstatement, indicating that the threshold for such an injunction was not met. The Court ordered that the appellant provide security for the respondent's costs. Furthermore, specific orders were made concerning the individuals to whom, and the manner in which, correspondence or communications relating to these proceedings should be directed. The costs of the various motions were awarded in favour of the respondent.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appellant's application to be reinstated in premises from which he was evicted, pending the hearing of his appeal, dismissed. Security for costs ordered. Orders made as to persons to whom, and manner in which, correspondence or communications in relation to these proceedings should be made. Costs of motions ordered in favour of respondent.
[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.]
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.