NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Appeal
CITATION: Malouf v Prince [2009] NSWCA 159
HEARING DATE(S): 21 April 2009
JUDGMENT DATE: 24 June 2009
JUDGMENT OF: McColl JA at 1; Macfarlan JA at 2; Nicholas J at 3
DECISION: 1. Application for leave to appeal refused with costs. 2.Motion to allow further evidence dismissed. 3. Applicant to pay the costs of the application before Beazley JA, for leave to appeal and the motion to allow further evidence. 4. Respondent's motion for dismissal of the application for leave to appeal dismissed. 5.No order as to costs in respect of the respondent's motion.
CATCHWORDS: APPEAL - leave to appeal - matter of practice and procedure - refusal of adjournment and related costs orders - interference with discretion of court below - whether injustice - general principles
LEGISLATION CITED: Supreme Court Act 1970 Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth)
CATEGORY: Principal judgment
Adam P Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd v Philip Morris [1981] HCA 39; (1981) 148 CLR 170 CASES CITED: Fox v Percy [2003] HCA 22; (2003) 214 CLR 118 Malouf v Prince [2008] NSWCA 153 Re Will of Gilbert (1946) 46 SR(NSW) 318
PARTIES: John Malouf - Applicant Stephen Thomas Prince - Respondent
FILE NUMBER(S): CA 40178 of 2008
Mr ATS Dawson - Applicant COUNSEL: Mr FG Lever SC - Respondent
SOLICITORS: Attwood Marshall Lawyers (QLD) - Applicant Walters Solicitors - Respondent
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court
LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): DC 24/07
LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: McLoughlin DCJ
LOWER COURT DATE OF DECISION: 11/06/08, 12/06/08
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