Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Application for stay on costs orders refused as appellants fail to establish prejudice or arguable grounds for appeal
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
The Court of Appeal refused an application by the defendants for a stay on the enforcement of costs orders arising from the dismissal of their appeal against three High Court orders. The court found no evidence to support the claim that execution of costs orders was imminent or prejudicial, particularly as adjudication of costs was likely to be protracted and any further Supreme Court appeal would be heard promptly. The court also held that the appellants failed to present any stateable or arguable grounds for appeal, relying instead on vague or misleading assertions and not addressing the reasons given in the judgment under appeal. As a result, the stay was refused and the respondents were awarded the costs of the current application.
stay on costs orders – Court of Appeal – refusal of appeal – leave to appeal – costs adjudication – execution of costs – High Court judgment – procedural acquiescence – grounds for appeal – balance of justice – undertakings – RSC (Rules of the Superior Courts) – breach of court order – Supreme Court appeal
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
