Marjanac v Plavsic [2014] NSWCATAP 63

Marjanac v Plavsic [2014] NSWCATAP 63

The Appeal Panel held that the Tribunal gave the appellant a reasonable opportunity to present his case, that no actual or apprehended bias was established, and that the Tribunal's acceptance of the respondents' expert evidence and rectification quote was not unfair, inequitable, or against the weight of evidence. The further evidence identified by the appellant was reasonably available at the original hearing, so no substantial miscarriage of justice was shown.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal in Home Building Proceedings Under the Home Building Act 1989 (nsw) / Appeal Panel; Appeal on Questions of Law and Application for Leave to Appeal on Other Grounds; on the Papers
Outcome
The appeal on questions of law is dismissed. Leave is refused for the appeal on grounds other than questions of law to proceed.
Legal Topics
['procedural Fairness' 'bias' 'leave to Appeal' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice' 'defective Building Work' 'rectification Costs']
['administrative Law' 'home Building' 'civil Procedure'] ['procedural Fairness' 'bias' 'leave to Appeal' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice' 'defective Building Work' 'rectification Costs']

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

Appeal in Home Building Proceedings Under the Home Building Act 1989 (nsw) / Appeal Panel; Appeal on Questions of Law and Application for Leave to Appeal on Other Grounds; on the Papers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal denied the appellant procedural fairness by not giving him enough time to present his case or by not taking his evidence into account.' 'Whether the Tribunal member was actually biased or whether there was apprehended bias.' 'Whether leave should be granted for an appeal on grounds other than questions of law because the decision was not fair and equitable, was against the weight of evidence, or significant new evidence had arisen.' 'Whether the appellant may have suffered a substantial miscarriage of justice if leave to appeal on other grounds was refused.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Panel held that the Tribunal gave the appellant a reasonable opportunity to present his case, that no actual or apprehended bias was established, and that the Tribunal's acceptance of the respondents' expert evidence and rectification quote was not unfair, inequitable, or against the weight of evidence. The further evidence identified by the appellant was reasonably available at the original hearing, so no substantial miscarriage of justice was shown.

Court Disposition

The appeal on questions of law is dismissed. Leave is refused for the appeal on grounds other than questions of law to proceed.

Orders

  • ['The appeal on questions of law is dismissed.' 'Leave is refused for the appeal on grounds other than questions of law to proceed.']