Sebie v Pham (No 5)
Case
•
[2022] NSWCA 111
•01 July 2022
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Sebie v Pham (No 5) [2022] NSWCA 111
[2022] NSWCA 111
01 July 2022
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The applicant, Sebie, sought a stay of orders for the payment of money out of court, pending an application for special leave to appeal to the High Court. The respondent was Pham. The application was heard by Brereton JA in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.
The primary legal issue before the Court was whether to grant a stay of the payment orders. This required the Court to consider whether there were sufficient prospects that special leave to appeal would be granted by the High Court, given that leave to appeal against the payment orders and earlier orders had already been refused by a majority of the Court. A further issue was the competency of the application for reconsideration under UCPR r 36.16.
Brereton JA found that a similar application for a stay had already been refused for lack of prospect that special leave would be granted. His Honour determined that the current application was incompetent as it was not made for a review of a previous decision, nor was there any suggestion that the previous conclusion was incorrect. Furthermore, no change of circumstances since the first decision was identified, and the stay was not sought by the only party potentially prejudiced by the relevant orders.
Consequently, the notice of motion filed on 22 December 2021 and amended on 4 May 2022 was dismissed with costs.
The primary legal issue before the Court was whether to grant a stay of the payment orders. This required the Court to consider whether there were sufficient prospects that special leave to appeal would be granted by the High Court, given that leave to appeal against the payment orders and earlier orders had already been refused by a majority of the Court. A further issue was the competency of the application for reconsideration under UCPR r 36.16.
Brereton JA found that a similar application for a stay had already been refused for lack of prospect that special leave would be granted. His Honour determined that the current application was incompetent as it was not made for a review of a previous decision, nor was there any suggestion that the previous conclusion was incorrect. Furthermore, no change of circumstances since the first decision was identified, and the stay was not sought by the only party potentially prejudiced by the relevant orders.
Consequently, the notice of motion filed on 22 December 2021 and amended on 4 May 2022 was dismissed with costs.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Costs
-
Jurisdiction
-
Res Judicata
-
Stay of Proceedings
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Sebie v Pham (No 5) [2022] NSWCA 111
Most Recent Citation
In the matter of ENA Development Pty Ltd (in liq) [2022] NSWSC 919