NSW Caselaw
Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Sebie v Pham (No 3) [2021] NSWCA 277 Hearing dates: 21 October 2021 Date of orders: 19 November 2021 Decision date: 19 November 2021 Before: Bell P and Basten JA at [1]; Brereton JA at [22] Decision: Summons seeking leave to appeal dismissed with costs. Catchwords: APPEALS – Leave to appeal – From orders for payment out from funds held in Court – Only other party with arguable claim to funds not permitted by Court to be re-joined as an applicant – Grant of leave would undermine Court's unanimous decision to refuse re-joinder – Significant obstacles and uncertainty attending to claim – Court concerned by potential undisclosed interest of first applicant – First and second respondents entitled to final resolution – Orders appealed from are discretionary – Leave refused APPEALS – Leave to appeal – From various other decisions dating back to 2017 – Application well out of time – No explanation for delay – Issues known to applicant and thus ought to have been raised much earlier – Rights of third parties have intervened – No errors demonstrated – Leave refused Legislation Cited: (NSW) Civil Procedure Act 2005, s 101(4) (NSW) Supreme Court Rules 1970, pt 40 r 1 (NSW) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, rr 7.1, 13.6, 36.1, 41.3 Cases Cited: Aquatic Air Pty Ltd v Siewert (No 3) [2018] NSWSC 624 Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd v Pham [2017] NSWCA 236 Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd v Pham [2018] NSWCA 74 Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd v Pham (No 1) [2018] NSWCA 180 Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd v Pham (No 2) [2018] NSWCA 185 Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd v Pham (No 3) [2019] NSWCA 138 Farrell v Mulroney [1978] 1 NSWLR 221 JKB Holdings Pty Ltd v de la Vega [2013] NSWSC 501 Pham v Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 446 Pham v Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd (No 2) [2017] NSWSC 583 Pham v Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd [2017] NSWSC 1509 Pham v Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd (No 2) [2018] NSWSC 22 Pham v Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd (No 3) [2018] NSWSC 381 Pham v Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd (No 7) [2018] NSWSC 1063 Pham v Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd (No 8) [2018] NSWSC 1492 Pham v Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd (No 10) [2018] NSWSC 1805 Pham v Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd (No 11) [2019] NSWSC 115 Pham v Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd (No 13) [2019] NSWSC 522 Pham v Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd [2019] NSWSC 1857 Pham v Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd [2020] NSWSC 1089 Pham v Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd [2021] NSWSC 339 Pham v Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd [2021] NSWSC 542 Sebie v Pham [2018] NSWCA 332 Sebie v Pham [2018] NSWCA 333 Sebie v Pham [2019] NSWCA 58 Sebie v Pham [2019] NSWCA 184 Sebie v Pham [2021] NSWCA 115 Sebie v Pham (No 2) [2021] NSWCA 274 Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services v Smith (2017) 95 NSWLR 597; [2017] NSWCA 206 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Robert Sebie (First Applicant) Ronald Jemmott (Second Applicant) Andy Vuong Duc Pham (First Respondent) Thi Huong Giang Pham (Second Respondent) ENA Development Pty Ltd (Third Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Self-represented (First Applicant) B Zipser (First and Second Respondents)
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