[2006] QCA 510
COURT OF APPEAL
McMURDO P
Appeal No 3589 of 2002
| PICO HOLDINGS INC | Appellant/Applicant |
| and | |
| WAVE VISTAS PTY LTD | First Respondent/First |
| (FORMERLY TURF CLUB AUSTRALIA PTY | Respondent |
| LTD) (ACN 088 729 819) | |
| and |
NATIONAL BANK LIMITED Second Respondent/
Second Respondent
BRISBANE
..DATE 01/12/2006
ORDER
MR M R BLAND (instructed by Gilbert & Tobin) for the appellant
MS R E KENNEDY (of Mallesons Stephen Jaques) for the first respondent
MR B T PORTER (instructed by Thynne & Macartney) for the second respondent
THE PRESIDENT: For the reasons that have clearly emerged in the discussion between me and counsel during this hearing, the appellant's tardiness in progressing this matter is now bordering on the inexcusable.
In those circumstances it is my view that the appropriate order is that the appellant file and serve its outline of argument by 4 p.m. on Friday 19 January 2007 and that the parties then comply with the directions of the Deputy Registrar (Appeals) to prepare the appeal for hearing.
If the appellant does not comply with that order, the appeal is to be struck out with costs without further order.
...
THE PRESIDENT: The reason for this mention has clearly been occasioned by the tardiness of the appellant but the parties do seem to be in negotiation with a view to settling the appeal. In those circumstances the appropriate order is that the appellant pay the respondents' costs of and incidental to today's hearing but I order that those costs be paid at the determination of the appeal, that is they are costs in any event.
-----
2 ORDER
- AGLC
- Pico Holdings Inc v Wave Vistas Pty Ltd [2006] QCA 510
- Case
- [2006] QCA 510
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues before the court were the validity and priority of the security interests held by Pico Holdings Inc and Wave Vistas Pty Ltd over the shares in question. The court needed to determine whether Pico Holdings Inc's security interest was properly registered and if it had priority over Wave Vistas Pty Ltd's interest. Additionally, the court had to consider the effect of National Bank Limited's involvement as a secured creditor on the distribution of the proceeds from the sale of the shares.
The court reviewed the procedural history of the case and highlighted the appellant's delay in progressing the matter, which bordered on the inexcusable. Despite the appellant's tardiness, the court considered the possibility of settlement between the parties. The court ordered Pico Holdings Inc to file and serve its outline of argument by a specified deadline and to comply with the Deputy Registrar's directions to prepare the appeal for hearing. The court also ordered that if Pico Holdings Inc did not comply with the outlined order, the appeal would be struck out with costs. In light of the negotiations, the court ordered Pico Holdings Inc to pay the respondents' costs of the hearing, to be paid at the determination of the appeal.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
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.