Vale v Vale

In *Vale v Vale*, the plaintiff appealed a decision of the primary judge, which had ordered the plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs. Following the assessment of these costs, a separate judgment was entered for the amount owed. The plaintiff subsequently initiated bankruptcy proceedings, and then applied to the Court of Appeal for a stay of execution on the costs judgment.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether to grant a stay of execution on the costs judgment, pending the determination of the plaintiff's substantive appeal. The Court was required to consider the strength of the plaintiff's appeal, the plaintiff's ability to pay the costs, and the potential impact of bankruptcy proceedings on the prosecution of the appeal.

Giles JA, applying established principles regarding stays of execution, found that while the plaintiff's appeal was arguable, it was not strong. The evidence indicated that the plaintiff was able to pay the costs and would be able to recover them should the appeal succeed. Furthermore, the Court was satisfied on the evidence that the plaintiff's husband was able and willing to fund the appeal, meaning that the bankruptcy proceedings would not bring an end to the appeal. Consequently, the Court concluded that a stay of execution was not warranted. The Notice of Motion filed by the plaintiff was dismissed with costs.