NSW Caselaw
Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Glad Retail Cleaning Pty Ltd v Alvarenga [2013] NSWCA 289 Hearing dates: 26 August 2013 Decision date: 26 August 2013 Before: McColl JA Decision: (1) On Glad Retail's notice of motion of 12 August 2013 order pursuant to UCPR 51.44 that Judge Elkaim's judgment of 28 March 2013 be stayed until the determination of the applicant's appeal. (2) In relation to Mirvac's notice of motion of 22 August 2013, order pursuant to UCPR 51.44 that Judge Elkaim's judgment of 28 March 2013 be stayed up to and including 5pm on 2 September 2013. (3) Mirvac to file and serve by noon on 28 August 2013 a motion seeking an extension of time to file a notice of appeal accompanied by an affidavit in support of the application and a draft notice of appeal, such notice of motion to be returnable (before the Registrar on 2 September 2013. (4) Costs of both motions to be costs in the appeal. [Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.] Catchwords: PROCEDURE - application for stay by appellant - where plaintiff does not seek to enforce judgment against appellant - where successful plaintiff seeks to enforce judgment against joint tortfeasor - where joint tortfeasor has not filed notice of appeal Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1946 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules Cases Cited: Alexander v Cambridge Credit Corp Ltd (1985) 2 NSWLR 685 TCN Channel 9 Pty Ltd v Antoniadis (No 2) [1999] NSWCA 104; (1999) 48 NSWLR 381 Category: Interlocutory applications Parties: Glad Retail Cleaning Pty Ltd - appellant Carolina Alvarenga - first respondent Mirvac Real Estate Pty Ltd - second respondent Representation: Counsel: D Priestley - appellant J de Greenlaw - first respondent W S Reynolds - second respondent Solicitors: McCabes Lawyers - appellant Gerard Malouf & Partners - first respondent Thompson Cooper Lawyers - second respondent File Number(s): 2013/127719 Publication restriction: No Decision under appeal Citation: Unreported Date of Decision: 2013-03-28 00:00:00 Before: Elkaim DCJ File Number(s): DC 2010/353197
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