Balois v March [2011] NSWDC 192

Balois v March [2011] NSWDC 192

The appellant was not denied procedural fairness as she was given sufficient opportunity to read the statement, present evidence, and make arguments. The Assessor preferred the evidence of the respondent as was within her discretion.

Parties
Appellant: Evalita Balois; Respondent: Judy March
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Summons dismissed; Local Court orders confirmed; appellant to pay respondent's costs.
Legal Topics
Appeal From Small Claims Division, Procedural Fairness, Breach of Contract
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Appeal From Small Claims Division Procedural Fairness Breach of Contract

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Evalita Balois

Appellant

Judy March

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellant was denied procedural fairness in the hearing before the Small Claims Assessor

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant was not denied procedural fairness as she was given sufficient opportunity to read the statement, present evidence, and make arguments. The Assessor preferred the evidence of the respondent as was within her discretion.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed; Local Court orders confirmed; appellant to pay respondent's costs.

Orders

  • The summons filed by the appellant on 31 August 2011 is dismissed.
  • The orders made by the Small Claims Assessor in the Local Court on 24 June 2011 are confirmed.