SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
Case Title: | Francis Pires v DibbsBarker Canberra Pty Limited |
Citation: | [2014] ACTSC 283 |
Hearing Date(s): | 3 October 2014 |
DecisionDate: | 20 November 2014 |
Before: | Refshauge J |
Decision: | 1. 3 October 2014 The application for leave to appeal be dismissed. 2. 20 November 2014 The applicant pay the respondent’s costs from 19 June 2014 to 8.30 am on 24 September 2014 on a party and party basis and thereafter on a solicitor-client basis. The stay of the sale and seizure order made in respect of the judgment entered in the ACT Civil and Administrative Appeals Tribunal on 23 May 2014 and 8 January 2014 between the applicant as judgment debtor and the respondent as judgment creditor be dissolved on and from 10.30 am on 20 November 2014. |
Category: | Principal Judgment |
Catchwords: | APPEAL - GENERAL PRINCIPLES – In General and Right of Appeal – Application for leave to appeal out of time – No question of fact or law to justify granting leave – Leave to appeal refused PROCEDURE – Costs – Calderbank offer – Self-represented litigant – Special costs order made |
Legislation Cited: | ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2005 (ACT), ss 7, 8, 16, 17, 18, 48 Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT), rr 1721, 5001, Div 2.18.5, Pt 2.18 (Enforcement) |
| Cases Cited: | A v Director of Family Services (1996) 132 FLR 172 |
| Parties: | Francis Pires (Appellant) DibbsBarker Canberra Pty Limited as trustee for the John Astley Buxton Discretionary Trust, DibbsBarker Pty Limited as trustee for the Keith Chester Fleming… |
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Pires v DibbsBarker Canberra Pty Limited 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
- [2014] ACTSC 283
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary issue for the Full Court was whether there were exceptional circumstances which justified granting leave to appeal out of time. The Full Court considered the criteria set out in the case law for making such an order and concluded that there were no exceptional circumstances present in this case which would justify granting leave to appeal out of time. The Full Court also considered the respondent’s application for costs. The Full Court noted that the appellant was a self-represented litigant and made a special costs order, awarding the respondent costs from 19 June 2014 to 8.30 am on 24 September 2014 on a party and party basis and thereafter on a solicitor-client basis.
The Full Court dismissed the appellant’s application for leave to appeal out of time. The Full Court found that there were no exceptional circumstances present in this case which would justify granting leave to appeal out of time. The Full Court noted that the appellant had not demonstrated any error of fact or law in the primary judge’s decision and that the appeal would not have a reasonable chance of success. The Full Court also dissolved the stay of the sale and seizure order made in respect of the judgment entered in the ACT Civil and Administrative Appeals Tribunal on 20 November 2014.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. 3 October 2014
The application for leave to appeal be dismissed.
2. 20 November 2014
The applicant pay the respondent’s costs from 19 June 2014 to 8.30 am on 24 September 2014 on a party and party basis and thereafter on a solicitor-client basis.
The stay of the sale and seizure order made in respect of the judgment entered in the ACT Civil and Administrative Appeals Tribunal on 23 May 2014 and 8 January 2014 between the applicant as judgment debtor and the respondent as judgment creditor be dissolved on and from 10.30 am on 20 November 2014.
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.