NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Young v Hones (No.5) [2016] NSWSC 822 Hearing dates: 9 June 2016 Date of orders: 09 June 2016 Decision date: 21 June 2016 Before: Garling J Decision: (1) Notice of Motion dated 7 June 2016 dismissed. (2) Applicant to pay the Respondents' costs. Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – civil – Notice of Motion seeking order restraining respondents from taking steps to enforce costs order – Civil Procedure Act 2005, s 135 – where enforcement steps to be taken under the Bankruptcy Act 1966 – whether Court has power to make the restraining order – whether applicant has arguable case in prospective proceedings against the respondents – whether applicant would suffer prejudice if restraining order not made – whether the balance of convenience favours making the restraining order Legislation Cited: Bankruptcy Act 1966 (C'th) Civil Procedure Act 2005 Fair Trading Act 1987 Supreme Court Act 1975 Cases Cited: Attwells v Jackson Lalic Lawyers Pty Ltd [2016] HCA 16 Grosvenor Constructions (NSW) Pty Ltd (in administration) v Musico [2014] NSWSC 344 Hamilton v Oades [1989] HCA 21; (1989) 166 CLR 486 Young v Hones [2013] NSWSC 580 Young v Hones (No.2) [2013] NSWSC 1429 Young v Hones (No.3) [2014] NSWSC 499 Young v Hones (No.4) [2015] NSWSC 792 Young v Hones [2014] NSWCA 337 Young v Hones [2014] NSWCA 338 Young v Hughes Trueman Pty Ltd & Anor [2016] FCCA 989 Young v King [2004] NSWLEC 93 Young v King (No.2) [2009] NSWLEC 125 Young v King (No.3) [2012] NSWLEC 42 Young v King (No.4) [2012] NSWLEC 236 Young v King (No.6) [2015] NSWLEC 111 Young v King (No.8) [2015] NSWLEC 187 Young v King (No.9) [2016] NSWLEC 4 Texts Cited: Not Applicable Category: Principal judgment Parties: Margo Young (Applicant) Brian Keith Hones (First Respondent) Jason Hones (Second Respondent) Ian Hemmings (Third Respondent) Hughes Trueman Pty Ltd (Fourth Respondent) Stephen John Perrens (Fifth Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Mr Newell (Applicant) Mr McManus / M Fenton(First and Second Respondents) D Miller SC / A Horvath(Third Respondent) S Gray(Fourth and Fifth 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