Tyneside Property Management Pty Limited & Ors v Hammersmith Management Pty Ltd

[2015] HCASL 127

TYNESIDE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT PTY LIMITED & ORS

v

HAMMERSMITH MANAGEMENT PTY LTD & ANOR

[2015] HCASL 127
S30/2015

1. The applicants were unsuccessful in proceedings brought against the respondents in the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Brereton J).  The applicants filed a notice of appeal to the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, and the respondents sought security for the costs of the appeal.  Sackville AJA ordered the applicants to provide security.  Sackville AJA accepted that the applicants were impecunious, but was not persuaded that an order for security would stultify the applicants' appeal given the potential availability of two sources of funds to the applicants:  funds from their solicitors, who were prepared to act on a speculative basis; and funds from the daughter of the third applicant.

2. The applicants failed to provide the security within the time specified by Sackville AJA, and the respondents sought summary dismissal of the appeal.  During this period, the applicants' solicitors ceased to represent the applicants.  The applicants filed notices of motion out of time, seeking to have the orders of Sackville AJA set aside.  The Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Basten, Meagher and Emmett JJA) dismissed the applicants' notices of motion and ordered that the appeal be dismissed unless the applicants provided security within a further specified time.

3. The applicants now seek special leave to appeal from the orders of the Court of Appeal. The applicants do not have legal representation and require an enlargement of time within which to lodge their application. The application therefore falls to be dealt with under rr 4.02 and 41.10 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth).

4. We would grant the applicants an enlargement of time but would refuse special leave to appeal.  The applicants have not identified any question of law which would warrant a grant of special leave, and there is no reason to doubt the correctness of the Court of Appeal's decision.  The application is dismissed.

5. Pursuant to r 41.10.5, we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

V.M. Bell
13 August 2015 S.J. Gageler