Mirow v Mirow [2022] NSWCATAP 383
The appellant failed to establish an error on a question of law or provide an adequate explanation for the delay in lodging the appeal. There are no fairly arguable grounds for appeal and no special circumstances warranting a departure from the default costs position. Therefore, the application to extend time to appeal is refused and each party is to bear their own costs.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 09 December 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Application to Extend Time to Appeal
- Outcome
- Application to extend time to appeal dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- ['extension of Time to Appeal' 'internal Appeal' 'procedural Fairness' 'residential Tenancy Termination' 'costs in Tribunal Proceedings']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application to Extend Time to Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether extension of time to appeal should be granted' 'Whether there was an error on a question of law' 'Whether appellant was afforded procedural fairness' 'Whether there are special circumstances warranting an award of costs']
Ratio Decidendi
The appellant failed to establish an error on a question of law or provide an adequate explanation for the delay in lodging the appeal. There are no fairly arguable grounds for appeal and no special circumstances warranting a departure from the default costs position. Therefore, the application to extend time to appeal is refused and each party is to bear their own costs.
Court Disposition
Application to extend time to appeal dismissed.
Orders
- ['The application to extend time to appeal is dismissed.' 'Each party is to bear their own costs.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment