Halcombe v Hitchman

[2018] ACTCA 5

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
COURT OF APPEAL

Case Title:

Halcombe v Hitchman

Citation:

[2018] ACTCA 5

Hearing Date:

5 March 2018

DecisionDate:

8 March 2018

Before:

Elkaim J

Decision:

The application for leave to appeal filed on 4 January 2018 is refused. The applicant is to pay the respondent’s costs of the application. 

Catchwords:

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL-GENERAL PRINCIPLES – In General and Right of Appeal – Application for leave to appeal from interlocutory judgment

Legislation Cited:

Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT) s 37J

Parties:

Thomas Halcombe (Applicant)

Darren Hitchman (Respondent)

Representation:

Counsel

Self-represented (Applicant)

Ms A Taylor (Respondent)

Solicitors

Self-represented (Applicant)

Meyer Vandenberg (Respondent)

File Number:

ACTCA 67 of 2017

ELKAIM J:

1. In this matter, I am sitting as a single judge of the Court of Appeal pursuant to s 37J of the Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT).

1. This decision should be read with my judgment in Halcombe v Hitchman [2018] ACTSC 56. In that matter, the application for leave to appeal against a decision of President Symons on 16 November 2017 was refused. As noted at [3] of that judgment, and as recognised by the applicant, the effect of a failure to obtain leave in that matter would mean that this application would necessarily fail.

1. In addition, even if the applicant were successful in the other matter, success in this matter would not have been of any practical value. The decision of Mossop J, from which the applicant is seeking leave to appeal, concerned a request from the applicant for a stay of eviction proceedings. The applicant has now left the premises. The need to stave off eviction has therefore fallen away.

1. I make the following orders:

(a)The application for leave to appeal filed on 4 January 2018 is refused.

(b)The applicant is to pay the respondent’s costs of the application.

1. I will hear any submissions seeking an alternate costs order.

I certify that the preceding five [5] numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of his Honour Justice Elkaim.

Associate:

Date: 8 March 2018