Miller v Nationwide News Pty Limited [2008] NSWCA 222

Miller v Nationwide News Pty Limited [2008] NSWCA 222

The notice of motion was dismissed because Beazley JA applied the correct approach in refusing an extension of time by considering whether Mr Miller had an arguable case on appeal, and no error was shown in her conclusion that there was no reasonable possibility an appeal court would overturn Delaney DCJ's factual findings and preference for the reporters' evidence over Mr Miller's evidence. The additional complaints about bias, file notes, date discrepancies, Mr Croke's letter and subpoena, and the timing of provision of information did not identify appellable error.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 September 2008
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion for Review of Decision of Single Judge of Appeal / Court of Appeal Review Under Supreme Court Act 1970 S 46(4)
Outcome
Notice of Motion dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['review of Decision of Single Judge of Appeal' 'extension of Time to Lodge Notice of Appeal' 'reference for Legal Assistance' 'arguable Case on Appeal' 'alleged Concluded Contract']
['procedure' 'contract'] ['review of Decision of Single Judge of Appeal' 'extension of Time to Lodge Notice of Appeal' 'reference for Legal Assistance' 'arguable Case on Appeal' 'alleged Concluded Contract']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion for Review of Decision of Single Judge of Appeal / Court of Appeal Review Under Supreme Court Act 1970 S 46(4)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Beazley JA erred in refusing an extension of time to lodge a notice of appeal on the basis that there was no arguable case on appeal.' "Whether there was any basis to overturn Beazley JA's decision under s 46(4) of the Supreme Court Act 1970." "Whether the proposed appeal had reasonable prospects of overturning Delaney DCJ's findings that no concluded contract was made." 'Whether allegations of bias, evidentiary error, false evidence, and refusal to permit subpoena or admit material showed appellable error.']

Ratio Decidendi

The notice of motion was dismissed because Beazley JA applied the correct approach in refusing an extension of time by considering whether Mr Miller had an arguable case on appeal, and no error was shown in her conclusion that there was no reasonable possibility an appeal court would overturn Delaney DCJ's factual findings and preference for the reporters' evidence over Mr Miller's evidence. The additional complaints about bias, file notes, date discrepancies, Mr Croke's letter and subpoena, and the timing of provision of information did not identify appellable error.

Court Disposition

Notice of Motion dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Notice of motion dismissed with costs.']