Wurth v Howard Smith Industries Pty Ltd (No 2) [2001] NSWCA 432

The appeal as to quantum had no prospects of success because the findings of the trial judge on credibility and medical evidence were well explained and supported; hence, extension of time was refused. There was no manifest error in the trial judge's discretion regarding costs and leave to appeal as to costs was refused.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 27 November 2001
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal as to Costs
Outcome: Summons for leave to appeal and notice of motion dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics: ['extension of Time to Appeal' 'leave to Appeal on Costs' 'assessment of Damages' 'credibility of Claimant' 'costs Orders']

['personal Injury' 'civil Procedure'] ['extension of Time to Appeal' 'leave to Appeal on Costs' 'assessment of Damages' 'credibility of Claimant' 'costs Orders']

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

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal as to Costs

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether extension of time for appeal should be granted' 'Whether leave to appeal as to costs should be granted' 'Whether the trial judge erred in assessing quantum of damages' 'Whether the trial judge erred in costs order after offer of compromise']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Summons for leave to appeal and notice of motion dismissed with costs.

Orders

['Summons for leave to appeal filed on 8 January 2001 dismissed with costs.' 'Notice of motion filed on 16 July 2001 dismissed with costs.']