Hu v Pender [2017] NSWCATAP 177

Hu v Pender [2017] NSWCATAP 177

The Appeal Panel refused an extension of time because the landlords gave no adequate explanation for the late and initially incompetent notice of appeal, did not establish that strict compliance with the rules would work injustice, and failed to show arguable prospects of success. Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed appeal raised only factual challenges, no significant new evidence arose, and the original findings were consistent with the weight of the evidence and involved no substantial miscarriage of justice. No fresh or further evidence was admitted. The appeal was dismissed except for two consent corrections to accidental errors in the original orders.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 August 2017
Procedural Posture
Residential Tenancy Appeal / Appeal Panel Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal From Consumer and Commercial Division Decision
Outcome
Application to extend time refused; leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed except for consent corrections to the original orders.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal Out of Time' 'questions of Fact on Appeal' 'fresh and Further Evidence' 'residential Tenancy Repairs' 'rent Reduction and Compensation']
['residential Tenancies' 'civil Procedure' 'administrative Law'] ['leave to Appeal Out of Time' 'questions of Fact on Appeal' 'fresh and Further Evidence' 'residential Tenancy Repairs' 'rent Reduction and Compensation']

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

Residential Tenancy Appeal / Appeal Panel Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal From Consumer and Commercial Division Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether time should be extended for filing the notice of appeal.' 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted for challenges to findings of fact or questions of fact.' 'Whether fresh or further evidence should be admitted on appeal.' 'Whether accidental errors in the original orders should be corrected by consent.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Panel refused an extension of time because the landlords gave no adequate explanation for the late and initially incompetent notice of appeal, did not establish that strict compliance with the rules would work injustice, and failed to show arguable prospects of success. Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed appeal raised only factual challenges, no significant new evidence arose, and the original findings were consistent with the weight of the evidence and involved no substantial miscarriage of justice. No fresh or further evidence was admitted. The appeal was dismissed except for two consent corrections to accidental errors in the original orders.

Court Disposition

Application to extend time refused; leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed except for consent corrections to the original orders.

Orders

  • ['The application to extend the time for the filing of the notice of appeal is refused.' 'Leave to appeal is refused.' 'Appeal dismissed except for corrections made by consent pursuant to Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) ss 63 and 81 to the original orders.' 'In the second sub-paragraph of order (3),...