Corcoran v Far [2019] NSWSC 1284

Corcoran v Far [2019] NSWSC 1284

Leave to appeal was refused because no substantial question of law warranting grant of leave was identified; most grounds raised factual disputes or invitations to merits review rather than legal error. The Appeal Panel's findings were supported by evidence, and it provided sufficient reasons. The statutory monetary limit did not warrant determination given the order was well below the threshold. Procedural fairness concerns were not substantiated.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Summons for Leave to Appeal / Decision on Leave to Appeal
Outcome
summons for leave to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'question of Law' 'appeal From Appeal Panel' 'breach of Quiet Enjoyment' 'compensation for Wrongful Eviction' 'statutory Interpretation']
['judicial Review' 'residential Tenancies'] ['leave to Appeal' 'question of Law' 'appeal From Appeal Panel' 'breach of Quiet Enjoyment' 'compensation for Wrongful Eviction' 'statutory Interpretation']

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

Summons for Leave to Appeal / Decision on Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether leave to appeal should be granted from the Appeal Panel's decision under Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) s 83" 'Whether the Appeal Panel erred in law in dismissing claims for damages and compensation' 'Whether the Appeal Panel failed to engage with arguments and provide adequate reasons' 'Statutory monetary limit for compensation under Residential Tenancies Regulation 2010' 'Application of procedural fairness principles']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because no substantial question of law warranting grant of leave was identified; most grounds raised factual disputes or invitations to merits review rather than legal error. The Appeal Panel's findings were supported by evidence, and it provided sufficient reasons. The statutory monetary limit did not warrant determination given the order was well below the threshold. Procedural fairness concerns were not substantiated.

Court Disposition

summons for leave to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Summons for leave to appeal dismissed.']