The case illustrates the application of stay principles where the respondent's financial position is contested, showing that a court may approach the case on the hypothesis that rejected evidence might be accepted on appeal. It also confirms that a notice of intention to appeal does not confer jurisdiction on the Court of Appeal, and that expedition of the appeal may be a critical factor in the balance of convenience favouring a conditional stay. Procedural failures in bringing a stay application may result in adverse costs orders even where the stay is granted.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 10 later cases that cite this judgment.
5 of the 10 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.