Streetscape Projects (Australia) Pty Ltd v The City of Sydney

Streetscape Projects (Australia) Pty Ltd and others (the appellants) sought a stay of a judgment, including a sum of $12,000,000, pending the hearing of their appeal, citing their alleged impecuniosity. The City of Sydney was the respondent. The application was heard by Young JA.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the appellants had established a sufficient basis to warrant a stay of the judgment. This involved determining whether their alleged inability to pay the judgment sum was a demonstrable fact, and if so, whether the Court could, or should, impose terms for a stay, particularly in light of the appellants' conduct.

Young JA found that the appellants had displayed a lack of candour in their evidence, particularly concerning a complex series of family trusts. While the evidence suggested the appellants might not personally possess the judgment sum, they failed to demonstrate that the funds were unavailable through these trusts. The Court reiterated the principle that the onus rests on the applicant for a stay to provide the necessary material upon which the Court can fix the terms of any such stay. As this onus was not discharged, the basis for the stay application was not made out.

Consequently, the notice of motion seeking the stay of the judgment was dismissed with costs.