Connectland Pty Ltd v Cardno Forbes Rigby Pty Ltd [2011] NSWCA 391

Leave to appeal was refused because Ms Caporale did not have an arguable case that the representation on which she relied was erroneous; the August 2011 letter was ambiguous and the uncontradicted affidavit evidence indicated that the relevant conversation occurred after the consent judgment.

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 06 December 2011
Procedural Posture: Civil Application for Leave to Appeal Against Consent Judgment / Application for Leave to Appeal in the Court of Appeal
Outcome: The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics: ['leave to Appeal' 'consent Judgment' 'misrepresentation' 'compromise of Court Proceedings' 'prospects of Success']

['civil Procedure' 'appeals' 'contract Law' 'equity'] ['leave to Appeal' 'consent Judgment' 'misrepresentation' 'compromise of Court Proceedings' 'prospects of Success']

Source-derived case record

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

Procedural Posture

Civil Application for Leave to Appeal Against Consent Judgment / Application for Leave to Appeal in the Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

1 ["Whether leave to appeal should be granted against a consent judgment on the basis that the respondent's alleged misrepresentation induced consent to judgment." "Whether the second applicant had an arguable case that the respondent's alleged representation was erroneous."]

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

Orders

["Ms Caporale's application for leave to appeal be dismissed with costs."]

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.