Vok and anor v Bernard George Madden [2008] NSWIRComm 118

Vok and anor v Bernard George Madden [2008] NSWIRComm 118

The extension of time was refused because Mr and Mrs Vok did not demonstrate any cogent reason for the long delay, the matters concerning the motor vehicle, computer equipment and superannuation could have been raised in the original proceedings or earlier than 14 May 2008, there was no explanation for the delay after July 2007, and the proposed appeal lacked merit.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Unfair Contract Proceedings; Application to Extend Time to Institute an Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Against Judgment and Orders Given on 7 November 2006
Outcome
Application refused.
Legal Topics
['unfair Contracts of Employment' 'extension of Time to Appeal' 'ex Parte Proceedings' 'new Evidence on Appeal' 'costs' 'bankruptcy and Competency of Proceedings']
['industrial Relations' 'employment Law' 'civil Procedure' 'bankruptcy'] ['unfair Contracts of Employment' 'extension of Time to Appeal' 'ex Parte Proceedings' 'new Evidence on Appeal' 'costs' 'bankruptcy and Competency of Proceedings']

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

Unfair Contract Proceedings; Application to Extend Time to Institute an Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Against Judgment and Orders Given on 7 November 2006

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether George and Eva Vok should be granted an extension of time to institute an appeal from Justice Backman's judgment and orders." 'Whether the alleged non-return of a company motor vehicle and computer equipment, and the disputed superannuation payment, provided a sufficient basis for an extension of time.' 'Whether the bankruptcy of George and Eva Vok affected the competency of the proceedings.']

Ratio Decidendi

The extension of time was refused because Mr and Mrs Vok did not demonstrate any cogent reason for the long delay, the matters concerning the motor vehicle, computer equipment and superannuation could have been raised in the original proceedings or earlier than 14 May 2008, there was no explanation for the delay after July 2007, and the proposed appeal lacked merit.

Court Disposition

Application refused.

Orders

  • ['The application for an extension of time in which to appeal is refused.' "George Vok and Eva Vok are to pay Bernard George Madden's costs in connection with the application assessed under the Legal Profession Act 2004 in default of agreement."]