Mitreski v His Eminence Metropolitan Petar the Diocesan Bishop of the Macedonian Orthodox Diocese of Australia and New Zealand [2009] NSWCA 319

New South Wales Court of Appeal

CITATION: Mitreski v His Eminence Metropolitan Petar the Diocesan Bishop of the Macedonian Orthodox Diocese of Australia and New Zealand [2009] NSWCA 319

HEARING DATE(S): 10 September 2009 JUDGMENT OF: Allsop P at 1; Tobias JA at 22; Handley AJA at 27

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE: 10 September 2009

1. Summons for leave to appeal from the orders of Young CJ in Eq dismissed. DECISION: 2. Application to renew the application for leave to appeal from the orders of Hamilton J refused. 3. The applicants (being the 1st to 6th and 8th defendants in the Equity Division) pay the costs of the respondents (the plaintiffs below) of summons and of the application for leave to renew the application for leave to appeal. 4. The 1st to 6th and 8th defendants pay the Attorney-General's costs of the summons and of the application for leave to renew the application for leave to appeal; the property in Schedule A to the judgment of Hamilton J dated 4 April 2003 may be resorted to for such costs as a last resort.

CATCHWORDS: APPEAL – leave to appeal - appeal from determination of separate questions – full disposition of hearing of first instance trial before exercise of the appellate jurisdiction - PROCEDURE - judgments and orders - effect of judgments - determination of separate questions - whether reasons of trial judge went beyond scope of separate questions – whether reasons foreclosed issues in the proceedings – whether failure to afford procedural fairness – answers given to separate questions do not preclude any aspect of further hearing at first instance - PROCEDURE - judgments and orders - effect of judgments - determination of separate questions - whether trial judge failed to answer many of the questions placed before him in the separate issues –unanswered questions remain live in the litigation at first instance – no need to invoke the appellate jurisdiction - APPEAL - application for leave to cross-appeal – revival of application previously dismissed by Court of Appeal – previous orders and declarations - whether orders and declarations below interlocutory – relevance of evidence for rest of hearing – whether answers to questions will preclude evidence being led