Ripani v Century Legend Pty Ltd (No 2)

Case [2022] FCA 289

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Ripani v Century Legend Pty Ltd (No 2) [2022] FCA 289

File number: VID 266 of 2020
Judgment of: ANASTASSIOU J
Date of judgment: 25 March 2022
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – extending time limited by earlier orders to allow for hearing and determination of stay application
Cases cited: Ripani v Century Legend Pty Ltd [2022] FCA 242
Division: General Division
Registry: Victoria
National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations
Sub-area: Regulator and Consumer Protection
Number of paragraphs: 4
Date of hearing: Determined on the papers

ORDERS

VID 266 of 2020
BETWEEN:

WALTER RIPANI

First Applicant

NINA RIPANI

Second Applicant
AND:

CENTURY LEGEND PTY LTD

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

ANASTASSIOU J

DATE OF ORDER:

25 MARCH 2022

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The time limited by Order 2 of the Orders made on 18 March 2022 be extended until 4pm on Monday, 28 March 2022.

Note:   Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.


REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

ANASTASSIOU J:

  1. On 24 March 2022, Charlotte Emilie Sinclair, a solicitor for the Respondent in this proceeding, filed an affidavit.  By reason of that affidavit, I became aware that the Respondent had filed a Notice of Appeal in relation to my judgment in Ripani v Century Legend Pty Ltd [2022] FCA 242 (the Judgment) and the orders I made on 18 March 2022 (the Orders). 

  2. The affidavit also foreshadowed an interlocutory application by which the Respondent would seek a stay in relation to the Orders pending the hearing and determination of the Respondent’s appeal to the Full Court of this Court (the stay application).  The following day, 25 March 2022, the Respondent’s stay application was formally accepted for filing.

  3. In view of the lateness of the application, and the pressures of the Court’s business, it was not practical for the stay application or any part of it to be determined today.

  4. In those circumstances, and only by reason of the impracticality I have described of that application being heard, I shall extend the time limited by Order 2 of the Orders until 4pm on Monday, 28 March 2022.

I certify that the preceding four (4) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of the Honourable Justice Anastassiou.

Associate:

Dated:       25 March 2022

Details
AGLC
Ripani v Century Legend Pty Ltd (No 2) [2022] FCA 289
Case
[2022] FCA 289
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Ripani v Century Legend Pty Ltd (No 2), the matter before the Federal Court involved a dispute between the parties, Ripani and Century Legend Pty Ltd, following a previous judgment and orders. The Respondent had filed a Notice of Appeal against the judgment and sought a stay of the orders pending the outcome of the appeal. The Court was faced with the task of deciding whether to extend the time limited by the earlier orders to allow for the hearing and determination of the stay application.

The legal issues that the Court had to resolve included whether the stay application was filed within a reasonable time frame and whether the Court should exercise its discretion to extend the time limit to accommodate the application. The Court also had to consider the practicalities and pressures of the Court's business when deciding whether to grant the extension.

In reaching its decision, the Court noted the lateness of the stay application and the pressures of the Court's business, which made it impractical to determine the stay application on the same day. Consequently, the Court decided to extend the time limited by Order 2 of the Orders made on 18 March 2022 until 4pm on Monday, 28 March 2022. This extension was granted solely due to the impracticality of hearing the stay application on the same day, and the Court emphasised that the extension was not a reflection of any view on the merits of the stay application.

The Court made an order extending the time limited by Order 2 of the Orders made on 18 March 2022 until 4pm on Monday, 28 March 2022. The entry of orders was dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The time limited by Order 2 of the Orders made on 18 March 2022 be extended until 4pm on Monday, 28 March 2022.

Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

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

On 24 March 2022, Charlotte Emilie Sinclair, a solicitor for the Respondent in this proceeding, filed an affidavit. By reason of that affidavit, I became aware that the Respondent had filed a Notice of Appeal in relation to my judgment in Ripani v Century Legend Pty Ltd [2022] FCA 242 (the Judgment) and the orders I made on 18 March 2022 (the Orders). The affidavit also foreshadowed an interlocutory application by which the Respondent would seek a stay in relation to the Orders pending the hearing and determination of the Respondent’s appeal to the Full Court of this Court (the stay application). The following day, 25 March 2022, the Respondent’s stay application was formally accepted for filing. In view of the lateness of the application, and the pressures of the Court’s business, it was not practical for the stay application or any part of it to be determined today. In those circumstances, and only by reason of the impracticality I have described of that application being heard, I shall extend the time limited by Order 2 of the Orders until 4pm on Monday, 28 March 2022.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.