O'Keefe & Anor. v. Eccleston & Anor. [2007] NSWCA 294

O'Keefe & Anor. v. Eccleston & Anor. [2007] NSWCA 294

Leave to appeal was refused because the matters raised did not indicate any significant possibility that Windeyer J was wrong in substance in answering questions three and four, and the separate concern about paragraph [17] did not involve any binding finding on the parties.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Court of Appeal Application From a Decision of Windeyer J Answering Separate Questions for Determination
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['application for Leave to Appeal' 'separate Questions for Determination' 'costs']
['practice and Procedure'] ['application for Leave to Appeal' 'separate Questions for Determination' 'costs']

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal / Court of Appeal Application From a Decision of Windeyer J Answering Separate Questions for Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether leave should be granted to appeal from the primary judge's answers to questions three and four of four separate questions for determination." "Whether a statement in paragraph [17] of the primary judge's reasons was a binding finding of fact."]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the matters raised did not indicate any significant possibility that Windeyer J was wrong in substance in answering questions three and four, and the separate concern about paragraph [17] did not involve any binding finding on the parties.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.']