WATKINS v MARSHALL [1988] NSWCA 170

WATKINS v MARSHALL [1988] NSWCA 170

Given the factual circumstances disclosed, and significant delay in seeking leave, this is not an appropriate case in which to grant leave to appeal concerning the limits of the apparent authority of counsel.

Parties
Claimant: Watkins; Opponent: Marshall
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 October 1988
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Summons for leave to appeal dismissed; claimants to pay opponents' costs.
Legal Topics
Apparent Authority of Counsel, Consent Orders, Leave to Appeal
Legal Practice Apparent Authority of Counsel Consent Orders Leave to Appeal

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Watkins

Claimant

Marshall

Opponent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the consent order was within the ostensible authority of counsel
  2. 2 Whether leave should be granted to appeal to set aside the consent order in the interests of justice

Ratio Decidendi

Given the factual circumstances disclosed, and significant delay in seeking leave, this is not an appropriate case in which to grant leave to appeal concerning the limits of the apparent authority of counsel.

Court Disposition

Summons for leave to appeal dismissed; claimants to pay opponents' costs.

Orders

  • Summons for leave to appeal dismissed
  • Claimants to pay the opponents' costs