Nanschild v Pratt [2011] NSWCA 85

Nanschild v Pratt [2011] NSWCA 85

The appeal did not meet the $100,000 threshold required for an appeal as of right under s 101(2)(r)(ii) Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW); the alleged prejudice was $66,598. The extension of time to seek leave to appeal was refused because of the applicant's slight prospects, the modest amount involved, her non-compliance with orders and delays, and lack of a sufficient interest of justice to justify the grant of extension.

Parties
Applicant: Deborah Nanschild; Respondent: Tracy Pratt
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 April 2011
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application to Extend Time and for Leave to Appeal Dismissed
Outcome
Summons and notice of motion for extension of time and/or leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time to Appeal, Leave to Appeal, Adjustive Property Order, Division of Property Post Relationship
Civil Procedure Family Law Extension of Time to Appeal Leave to Appeal Adjustive Property Order Division of Property Post Relationship

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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Deborah Nanschild

Applicant

Tracy Pratt

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application to Extend Time and for Leave to Appeal Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an appeal lay as of right or required leave under s 101(2)(r)(ii) of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether an extension of time to seek leave to appeal or file an appeal should be granted
  3. 3 Whether the prospects for obtaining leave to appeal justified granting the extension

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal did not meet the $100,000 threshold required for an appeal as of right under s 101(2)(r)(ii) Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW); the alleged prejudice was $66,598. The extension of time to seek leave to appeal was refused because of the applicant's slight prospects, the modest amount involved, her non-compliance with orders and delays, and lack of a sufficient interest of justice to justify the grant of extension.

Court Disposition

Summons and notice of motion for extension of time and/or leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Summons filed on 16 November 2010 dismissed with costs.
  • Notice of motion filed on 22 November 2010 dismissed with costs.