Di Liristi v Matautia Developments Pty Ltd [2020] NSWCATAP 166

Di Liristi v Matautia Developments Pty Ltd [2020] NSWCATAP 166

The Appeal Panel held that the mere fact that Senior Member Dubler SC and counsel for the respondent were members of the same barristers' floor did not create a reasonable apprehension of bias. Although the notice of appeal was filed 4 days late, time was extended because the delay was short and no evidence of prejudice was shown. Leave to appeal from the interlocutory grant of legal representation was refused because the Tribunal considered relevant factors, including complexity and related proceedings, and reached a conclusion open on the facts. There was no denial of procedural fairness because the appellant was heard on legal representation. The consent timetable directions were...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Internal Appeal Under S 80(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (nsw) Concerning Residential Tenancy Proceedings / Appeal From Interlocutory Directions Made on 1 May 2020 in the Consumer and Commercial Division; Application for Recusal and Extension of Time Considered
Outcome
Time for filing the notice of appeal extended; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['internal Appeal' 'interlocutory Directions' 'legal Representation in Ncat' 'procedural Fairness' 'apprehended Bias' 'extension of Time' 'consent Directions']
['administrative Law' 'residential Tenancy' 'civil Procedure'] ['internal Appeal' 'interlocutory Directions' 'legal Representation in Ncat' 'procedural Fairness' 'apprehended Bias' 'extension of Time' 'consent Directions']

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

Internal Appeal Under S 80(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (nsw) Concerning Residential Tenancy Proceedings / Appeal From Interlocutory Directions Made on 1 May 2020 in the Consumer and Commercial Division; Application for Recusal and Extension of Time Considered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Senior Member Dubler SC should recuse himself for apprehended bias because he occupied rooms on the same floor of chambers as counsel for the respondent.' 'Whether time should be extended for filing the notice of appeal lodged 4 days out of time.' 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted from an interlocutory decision granting legal representation under s 45 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW).' 'Whether the Tribunal denied procedural fairness by determining legal representation at the end of the directions hearing.' 'Whether consent procedural directions for exchange of evidence should be disturbed on appeal.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Panel held that the mere fact that Senior Member Dubler SC and counsel for the respondent were members of the same barristers' floor did not create a reasonable apprehension of bias. Although the notice of appeal was filed 4 days late, time was extended because the delay was short and no evidence of prejudice was shown. Leave to appeal from the interlocutory grant of legal representation was refused because the Tribunal considered relevant factors, including complexity and related proceedings, and reached a conclusion open on the facts. There was no denial of procedural fairness because the appellant was heard on legal representation. The consent timetable directions were...

Court Disposition

Time for filing the notice of appeal extended; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Time for filing the notice of appeal is extended to 19 May 2020.' 'Appeal dismissed.']