Practitioners acting for foreign-resident appellants with substantial unencumbered real property in NSW should consider proffering undertakings to preserve asset equity as an alternative to paying security, particularly where freezing orders already exist. The judgment also confirms that foreign residency alone does not impose a legal onus on the appellant to demonstrate why security should not be ordered, and leaves open whether 'special circumstances' under r 51.50 condition the exercise of r 42.21 power in the Court of Appeal.
The full text is available to signed-in members.