Nelson v Ivy Landscapes Pty Ltd [2022] NSWCATAP 210

Nelson v Ivy Landscapes Pty Ltd [2022] NSWCATAP 210

Leave to appeal was refused because the appellant's new evidence was reasonably available to him prior to the hearing and thus did not satisfy the requirements of cl 12(1)(c) of Sch 4 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW).

Parties
Appellant: David Nelson; Respondent: Ivy Landscapes Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Internal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; work order compliance date varied
Legal Topics
Appeal, Leave to Appeal, Admissibility of New Evidence, Rectification Orders, Tribunal Procedure

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Nelson

Appellant

Ivy Landscapes Pty Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Internal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted on the basis of significant new evidence under cl 12(1)(c) of Sch 4 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether the evidence proffered by the appellant was not reasonably available at the time of the Tribunal hearing
  3. 3 Whether the procedures and directions of the Tribunal were complied with by the appellant

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the appellant's new evidence was reasonably available to him prior to the hearing and thus did not satisfy the requirements of cl 12(1)(c) of Sch 4 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW).

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; work order compliance date varied

Orders

  • Leave to appeal refused.
  • Order 1 made by the Tribunal on 15 March 2022 is varied by substituting the date "12 August 2022" for the date "02-May-2022".