Louridas v Askander [2021] NSWCATAP 261

Louridas v Askander [2021] NSWCATAP 261

The Appeal Panel dismissed the appeal because the appellants did not establish any denial of procedural fairness, duress, mistake, procedural irregularity or error of law warranting the setting aside of the consent orders. The hearing lasted about an hour and a half, the transcript extracts did not show a chaotic or pressured agreement, the appellants' son represented and communicated with them, and the appellants had the opportunity to discuss the issues before consent was conveyed to the Tribunal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 September 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Civil and Administrative Tribunal, Consumer and Commercial Division Decision Concerning Dividing Fence Orders / Appeal Panel
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed.
Legal Topics
['procedural Fairness' 'consent Orders' 'dividing Fences' 'fences and Boundaries' 'internal Appeals']
['civil Procedure' 'environment and Planning'] ['procedural Fairness' 'consent Orders' 'dividing Fences' 'fences and Boundaries' 'internal Appeals']

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

Appeal From Civil and Administrative Tribunal, Consumer and Commercial Division Decision Concerning Dividing Fence Orders / Appeal Panel

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appellants were denied procedural fairness during the Tribunal hearing because they could not listen to the hearing and therefore did not give informed consent to consent orders.' 'Whether the consent orders should be set aside on grounds including duress, mistake or procedural irregularity.' 'Whether the Tribunal erred by making consent orders that did not address alleged boundary encroachments or orders under s 14(1)(a) of the Dividing Fences Act 1991 (NSW).']

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Panel dismissed the appeal because the appellants did not establish any denial of procedural fairness, duress, mistake, procedural irregularity or error of law warranting the setting aside of the consent orders. The hearing lasted about an hour and a half, the transcript extracts did not show a chaotic or pressured agreement, the appellants' son represented and communicated with them, and the appellants had the opportunity to discuss the issues before consent was conveyed to the Tribunal.

Court Disposition

The appeal is dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The Appeal is dismissed.']