Pham v Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd and Others; Pham v Sebie (No. 7) [2018] NSWSC 1063

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Pham v Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd and Others; Pham v Sebie (No. 7) [2018] NSWSC 1063 Hearing dates: 28 May, 12 & 14 June and 2 July 2018 Date of orders: 13 July 2018 Decision date: 13 July 2018 Jurisdiction: Equity Before: Slattery J Decision: Order for possession of subject premises made. Order made for security for the cross-defendants' costs of the cross-claim. Defendants ordered to pay the plaintiffs' costs of the contests in relation to the orders for possession and security for costs. Catchwords: REAL PROPERTY – possession of land – plaintiffs are the registered proprietors of Torrens title land as the result of Court orders made against the defendants – but defendants remain in possession of the land – plaintiffs seek orders for possession by notice of motion – defendants contend notice of motion not served on all occupants of the land – whether service effected on occupants in accordance with Uniform Civil Procedure Rule ("UCPR"), r 6.8 – whether compliance with UCPR, r 6.8 is a pre-condition to making an order for possession – occupants of land alleged to be tenants of previous registered proprietor – whether order for possession can be made whilst tenants are in occupation.

SECURITY FOR COSTS – UCPR, r 42.21 - cross-claimant company brings proceedings claiming a declaration that it holds an equitable interest by way of charge over Torrens title land – the registered proprietors, the cross-defendants, apply by motion for an order for security for their costs of the cross-claim – cross-claimant company is without demonstrable assets available to satisfy any costs order against it – no guarantee offered by any natural person to satisfy costs orders that may be made against the cross-claimant – cross-claimant relies upon monies in Court as a potential fund from which an order for the payment of costs can be secured by the cross-claimant company – whether in the circumstances an order for security for costs should be made. Legislation Cited: Family Law Act 1975, s 79 Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-vesting) Act 1987, s 5(1) Real Property Act 1900, ss 42, 43, 74J Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, rr 6.8, 36.8, 42.21 Cases Cited: Hoffmann v Challis (No. 2) [2016] NSWSC 269 John Alexander's Clubs Pty Ltd v White City Tennis Club Ltd (2010) 241 CLR 1 Lex Fitness Pty Ltd ATF Lex Family Trust v Australian Fitness Management Pty Ltd; Australian Fitness Management Pty Ltd v Lex Fitness Pty Ltd ATF Lex Family Trust [2017] NSWSC 157 Pham v Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd and Others; Pham v Sebie [2017] NSWSC 1509 Pham v Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd and Others; Pham v Sebie (No. 2) [2018] NSWSC 22 Pham v Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd and Others; Pham v Sebie (No. 3) [2018] NSWSC 381 Pham v Mazen Zraika; Pham v Sebie (No. 4) [2018] NSWSC 566 Pham v Enterprise ICT Pty Ltd and Others; Pham v Sebie (No. 5) [2018] NSWSC 567 Ramzy Sebie v Andy Duong Duc Pham (No. 6) [2018] NSWSC 592 Category: Consequential orders (other than Costs) Parties: In proceedings 2015/325044: