Tov-Lev v Lowbeer (No 3)

In Tov-Lev v Lowbeer (No 3) [2014] FCA 699, the applicants, Rabbi Dr Samuel Tov-Lev, David Cliffe, and Joseph de Varda, sought an order to stay all proceedings under the sequestration orders against them pending the determination of an application for special leave to appeal to the High Court. The respondents, John Joseph Lowbeer and the trustee in bankruptcy, opposed the application. The matter was before the Federal Court of Australia, specifically the New South Wales District Registry, in the General Division.

The legal issue before the Court was whether the applicants had demonstrated an arguable ground for appeal, and if so, whether the balance of convenience favoured the granting of a stay of the sequestration proceedings. The Court considered the prospects of special leave being granted, as well as the applicants' submissions on the balance of convenience. The Court found that the applicants had not demonstrated an arguable ground for appeal, as their submissions did not address the reasoning in the judgment of Rares J, which was the subject of the special leave application. The Court also found that the applicants had not demonstrated a sufficient balance of convenience in their favour to warrant the granting of a stay. Consequently, the Court refused the relief sought in paragraph 1 of the interlocutory application.

The Court ordered that the application in paragraph 1 of the interlocutory application filed on 30 May 2014 be refused, and that the balance of the interlocutory application be stood over to be dealt with by the Court at a time to be notified to the parties. The applicants were ordered to pay the respondents' costs of the application in paragraph 1 of the interlocutory application filed on 30 May 2014, and no order was made in relation to the costs of the trustee.