Federal Court of Australia
CATCHWORDS Practice and procedure - interlocutory relief - previous application for interlocutory relief dismissed - change of
circumstances relating to balance of convenience but net in
relation to prima facie case - exercise of discreticn.
SCAPEL PTY LIMI 7, CITY LOAN AND CPEDIT COPEOPATION PTY
LIMITED
Coram: Sheppard J. Date : 23 February 1987
Flace: Svdnev
IN_ THE EPAL COURT OF ANSTPALTA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTPICT REGISTRY No. GE13 of 1986
-+- ~~ w
GENERAL DIVISION
BETWEEN :
SCAREL PTY LIMITED
Applicant
=ND: CITY LOAN AND CREDIT COPPOPATION PTY LIMITED Fespondent CORAM SHEPPAPD J. PLACE SYDNEY DA' 23 FEBRUARY 1987 MINUTES OF OPDER THE COURT OPDERS THAT: - lL. The application fer an interlocutory intunction be dismissed.
Z The applicant vay the resvoondent's Tasts of the
NOTE: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 25
of the Federal Court FPules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTPALIA
a) )
NEW SONTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY | No. G513 of 1986 \
GENERAL DIVISTON )
BETWEEN : SCAPEL PTY LIMITED
Applicant
CITY LOAN AND CREDIT CORPORATION ELTY LIMITED
Pespondent
COPAM: SHEPPAPD J.
DATE : 73 FEBRUARY 1987
PEASONS FOR TIRCMENT
HIS HONOUR: This is an application for interlocutory relief. The motion seeks an order restraining the respondent from submitting for auction sale on Thursday next, 26 February, a property at Normanhurst over which the respondent holds an equitable charge. The matter was previously the subject of proceedings for interlocutory relief. These came on late in November last vear before Fox J. After a hearing which occupied be
v@ application. Tt i
uh
more fhan two days, his Honour dismissed ¢
submitted on Sehalf of the applicant that nevertheless this avolication can succeed because of changes in the circumstance:
of the varties which have come about since Fox J. decided the
matter.
I should say at this point that there has not been time this morning for there to be an analysis of what authorities there may be in relation to the question of whether, once interlocutecry relief has been refused after a full hearing, a further application will be entertained by another judge. No question, of course, of issue estoppel or res judicata can arise if the proceedings are not final in character, but it seems to me that there must be discretionary considerations which would militate against an applicant who has failed in obtaining interlsocutary eelief going on similar facts '2 ancther tuige and seeking the same relief from him. The position is different, un my ceinicn,
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate