Rodny v Stricke [2020] NSWSC 800

Rodny v Stricke [2020] NSWSC 800

Leave to appeal was refused because the plaintiffs did not establish that the Appeal Panel's refusal of leave, or the underlying listing and adjournment decisions, involved legal unreasonableness or denial of procedural fairness. The decisions had an evident and intelligible justification in the history of the proceedings, the prior adjournment, the need to accommodate parties and witnesses, the Tribunal's guiding principle, and the plaintiffs' sparse evidence and limited demonstrated efforts to secure alternative representation. The Appeal Panel was entitled to focus on the adjournment decision, to consider the plaintiffs' options including withdrawal and refiling, and to take the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of New South Wales From a Decision of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal Appeal Panel / Leave to Appeal Against Refusal of Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Listing and Adjournment Decisions, and Challenge to Costs Order
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; amended summons dismissed; plaintiffs ordered to pay defendants' costs unless a timely application for a different order is made.
Legal Topics
['legal Unreasonableness' 'procedural Fairness' 'adjournment' 'listing Decision' 'leave to Appeal From NCAT Appeal Panel' 'costs in NCAT Proceedings' 'guiding Principle in Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (nsw)']
['administrative Law' 'civil Procedure' 'strata Schemes' 'appeals' 'costs'] ['legal Unreasonableness' 'procedural Fairness' 'adjournment' 'listing Decision' 'leave to Appeal From NCAT Appeal Panel' 'costs in NCAT Proceedings' 'guiding Principle in Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (nsw)']

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 to the Supreme Court of New South Wales From a Decision of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal Appeal Panel / Leave to Appeal Against Refusal of Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Listing and Adjournment Decisions, and Challenge to Costs Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Appeal Panel's refusal of leave to appeal against the Tribunal's refusal to adjourn proceedings involved legal error." "Whether the Tribunal's listing decision or adjournment decision was legally unreasonable." 'Whether the listing decision or adjournment decision denied the plaintiffs procedural fairness.' "Whether the Appeal Panel erred in ordering the plaintiffs to pay the defendants' costs of the appeal by taking into account an irrelevant consideration."]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the plaintiffs did not establish that the Appeal Panel's refusal of leave, or the underlying listing and adjournment decisions, involved legal unreasonableness or denial of procedural fairness. The decisions had an evident and intelligible justification in the history of the proceedings, the prior adjournment, the need to accommodate parties and witnesses, the Tribunal's guiding principle, and the plaintiffs' sparse evidence and limited demonstrated efforts to secure alternative representation. The Appeal Panel was entitled to focus on the adjournment decision, to consider the plaintiffs' options including withdrawal and refiling, and to take the...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; amended summons dismissed; plaintiffs ordered to pay defendants' costs unless a timely application for a different order is made.

Orders

  • ['Refuse leave to appeal.' 'Dismiss the amended summons filed 19 June 2020.' "Subject to an application being made in writing to my Associate within seven days of the date of this order for a different order, order the plaintiffs to pay the defendants' costs of the proceedings."]