Kassis v Maher [2022] NSWCATAP 181

Kassis v Maher [2022] NSWCATAP 181

The appeal was dismissed and leave to appeal refused because the Appeal Panel was not persuaded that the Tribunal erred in proceeding in the appellant's absence, was not persuaded that a telecommunications outage prevented the appellant from appearing, and was not satisfied that Mr Farah's report was not reasonably available or constituted significant new evidence capable of producing a significant possibility of a more favourable result.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Appeal From NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal, Consumer and Commercial Division Decision Concerning Compensation for Defective Tiling Work / Appeal Panel Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; leave to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
['procedural Fairness' 'leave to Appeal' 'significant New Evidence' 'expert Evidence' 'defective Tiling Work' 'compensation']
['civil Procedure' 'consumer and Commercial' 'home Building'] ['procedural Fairness' 'leave to Appeal' 'significant New Evidence' 'expert Evidence' 'defective Tiling Work' 'compensation']

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 From NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal, Consumer and Commercial Division Decision Concerning Compensation for Defective Tiling Work / Appeal Panel Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appellant was denied procedural fairness because he was not able to appear by telephone at the Tribunal hearing at first instance.' "Whether Mr Farah's expert report was significant new evidence which was not reasonably available to the appellant at the time of the Tribunal hearing." 'Whether there was a significant possibility that a different, more favourable result for the appellant would have been achieved if the report had been before the Tribunal.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed and leave to appeal refused because the Appeal Panel was not persuaded that the Tribunal erred in proceeding in the appellant's absence, was not persuaded that a telecommunications outage prevented the appellant from appearing, and was not satisfied that Mr Farah's report was not reasonably available or constituted significant new evidence capable of producing a significant possibility of a more favourable result.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.' 'Leave to appeal is refused.']