De Simone Consulting Pty Ltd v Ison (No 2) [2000] NSWIRComm 269

De Simone Consulting Pty Ltd v Ison (No 2) [2000] NSWIRComm 269

Leave to appeal was refused because no error of fact or principle was shown in Hungerford J's discretionary refusal to extend time, no unusual circumstances or substantial issue of principle was demonstrated, and the applicant sought in substance only a re-exercise of the first instance discretion. Indemnity costs for the hearing of the appeal were awarded because the appeal raised no issue attracting leave and there was no proper basis for the appeal from a discretionary decision.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 November 2000
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal / Full Bench in Court Session From a Decision of Hungerford J Refusing an Extension of Time Under S 189 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed; costs ordered, including indemnity costs for specified proceedings.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'extension of Time' 'discretionary Decisions' 'indemnity Costs' 'stay Dissolution']
['industrial Relations' 'appellate Procedure' 'costs'] ['leave to Appeal' 'extension of Time' 'discretionary Decisions' 'indemnity Costs' 'stay Dissolution']

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

Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal / Full Bench in Court Session From a Decision of Hungerford J Refusing an Extension of Time Under S 189 of the Industrial Relations Act 1996

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether leave to appeal should be granted from Hungerford J's refusal to extend time to bring an application for leave to appeal and appeal from decisions and orders of an Industrial Magistrate." "Whether Hungerford J's discretionary decision revealed any error of fact or principle." 'Whether indemnity costs should be awarded for the hearing of the appeal.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because no error of fact or principle was shown in Hungerford J's discretionary refusal to extend time, no unusual circumstances or substantial issue of principle was demonstrated, and the applicant sought in substance only a re-exercise of the first instance discretion. Indemnity costs for the hearing of the appeal were awarded because the appeal raised no issue attracting leave and there was no proper basis for the appeal from a discretionary decision.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed; costs ordered, including indemnity costs for specified proceedings.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal refused.' 'Appeal dismissed.' 'Stay granted on 5 July 2000 dissolved.' "The monies held in the appellant's solicitor's trust account in accordance with the stay granted on 5 July 2000 together with interest thereon be paid to the respondent's solicitors within seven days of today." "The Court notes...