Loading...
Queensland Judgments

beta

Authorised Reports & Unreported Judgments
Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
  • Unreported Judgment

Denning v Jet Development Pty Ltd

 

[2007] QCA 63

 

COURT OF APPEAL

 

WILLIAMS JA

KEANE JA

 

Appeal No 10779 of 2006

 

ROYALIN MARGARET DENNINGApplicant

and

JET DEVELOPMENT PTY LTD

ACN 107 913 762First Respondent

and

FERNVALE PROJECTS PTY LTD

ACN 119 408 767Second Respondent

 

BRISBANE

 

DATE 07/03/2007

 

JUDGMENT

 

MR A M DAUBNEY SC, with him MR P J McCAFFERTY (instructed by Morgan Conley Solicitors) for the applicant

 

MR J W PEDEN (instructed by Flower & Hart) for the respondents

 

WILLIAMS JA:  The applicant has not demonstrated that there is any serious or substantive question of law to be raised on the special leave application.

 

The decision of this Court involved the construction of clauses in a contract which were limited to the contract in question.  Any stay would, on the material, cause significant inconvenience and possible significant loss to the respondents.  The respondents' development is at risk if there is any substantial delay.  Any undertaking as to damages would not be sufficient protection to the respondents.

 

In my view the appropriate test for a stay pending an application for special leave to appeal to the High Court is to be found in Jennings Constructions Ltd v Burgundy Royale Investments Pty Ltd (1986) 161 CLR 681 and J v L & A Services Pty Ltd [1993] 2 QdR 380.  Applying that test, the application for a stay should be refused with costs.

 

KEANE JA:  I agree.

 

WILLIAMS JA:  That is the order of the Court.

 

Close

Editorial Notes

  • Published Case Name:

    Denning v Jet Development Pty Ltd & Anor

  • Shortened Case Name:

    Denning v Jet Development Pty Ltd

  • MNC:

    [2007] QCA 63

  • Court:

    QCA

  • Judge(s):

    Williams JA, Keane JA

  • Date:

    07 Mar 2007

Litigation History

No Litigation History

Appeal Status

No Status