Ye v Chen - [2021] NSWSC 272

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Ye v Chen [2021] NSWSC 272
Hearing dates: 22 March 2021
Date of orders: 22 March 2021
Decision date: 22 March 2021
Jurisdiction: Common Law
Before: Beech-Jones J
Decision:
(1)   Set aside the stay orders granted by Stapleton LCM on 18 February 2021. In lieu thereof, order that:
(i)   The sum of $86,019.33 currently held by Ms Ye's solicitors be paid within four working days to the trust account of Ms Chen's solicitors, but not be further dissipated by them without an order of the Court.
(ii)   The judgment of the Local Court, the subject of this appeal, be stayed pending determination of the appeal on condition that on or before 31 May 2021, the appellants pay the further sum of $150,000 into Ms Chen's solicitor's trust account, which if paid are not to be further dissipated by them without further order of the court.
(2)   On or before 5pm on Thursday 1 April 2021, Ms Ye is to file and serve an affidavit setting out all her assets and liabilities and all the assets and liabilities of UCER Investment and Resources Management Pty Ltd held within this country and abroad.
(3)   Until further order, Ms Ye is restrained from disposing of or dealing with or otherwise dissipating the net proceeds of any funds derived from the sale of property comprised in Lot 17 in Deposited Plan 7118 and known as 26 Happ Street Auburn other than to comply with Order 1(ii).
(4)   Ms Ye is to provide the solicitors for Ms Chen seven days' advance written notice of:
(a)   her intention to place for sale the property comprised in Lot 17 in Deposited Plan 7118 and known as 26 Happ Street Auburn; and
(b)   if it is proposed to sell that property by auction, to notify of the reserve price.
(5)   The plaintiffs pay the defendant's costs of today.
(6)   The notice of motion dated 16 March 2021 seeking 11 orders, be otherwise dismissed.

Catchwords:
LOCAL COURT APPEAL – stay – no question of principle

Category: Procedural rulings
Parties: Rebecca Ye (Respondent/First Plaintiff)
UCER Investment and Resources and Management Pty Ltd (Respondent/Second Plaintiff)
Yu Chen (Applicant/Defendant)
Representation:
Counsel:
J Harrison (Applicant)
A Cheema (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Prudential Legal (Applicant)
Auburn Lawyers (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2021/6370

EX TEMPORE Judgment

By summons filed on 8 January 2021, the first plaintiff, Rebecca Ye, and the second plaintiff, UCER Investment and Resources and Management Pty Ltd (“UCER”) appealed judgments entered against them, or at least one of them, in the Local Court granted in favour of the first defendant, Yu Chen.
The judgment had been given on 11 December 2020 in favour of Ms Chen for the judgment sum of $72,350.66 together with interest which ultimately totalled the sum of $86,019.33.
I have briefly reviewed the learned Magistrate's reasons. In short, Ms Chen alleged that she provided to Ms Ye and UCER the sum of USD$50,000 on account of migration services, which were not provided and…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Ye v Chen

Details

AGLC: Ye v Chen [2021] NSWSC 272
Case: [2021] NSWSC 272
Decision Date: 22 March 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Local Court appeal of Ye v Chen, the primary dispute was between the appellant, Ye, and the respondent, Chen, over the validity of a stay order issued by the Local Court. Ye sought to appeal the decision of the Local Court to grant a stay of proceedings in his personal injury claim against Chen. The appeal was heard in the Supreme Court, which was tasked with determining whether the Local Court's decision to grant a stay was correct.

The legal issues before the court were whether the Local Court had the authority to grant a stay and whether the exercise of that authority was justified in the circumstances of the case. Specifically, the court needed to consider whether the Local Court correctly applied the criteria for granting a stay and whether there was a sufficient basis for the decision. The appellant argued that the Local Court had misapplied the relevant legal principles and that the stay order should be set aside.

The Supreme Court, in its judgment, held that the Local Court had the jurisdiction to grant a stay and that its decision was not an error of law. The court found that the Local Court had correctly applied the relevant criteria and that the reasons given for the stay were sufficient. The Supreme Court also noted that the matter did not involve a question of principle that warranted an appeal to a higher court. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the stay order granted by the Local Court was upheld.

The final orders of the court were that the appeal be dismissed with costs. The stay order issued by the Local Court remained in effect, and the proceedings were stayed pending further orders of the court.

Orders