Fairyglen v Lunsmann & Anor [2003] NSWSC 696

No manifest error of law or strong evidence of error of law was found on the face of the arbitrator's award, and the arbitrator was entitled to find no tenancy with the plaintiff company. Therefore, leave to appeal should not be granted under s 38 of the Commercial Arbitration Act 1984.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 31 July 2003
Procedural Posture: Application for Leave to Appeal From Arbitration / Application for Leave to Appeal; Judgment
Outcome: Summons dismissed; costs awarded to defendant.
Legal Topics: ['leave to Appeal From Arbitrator' 'manifest Error of Law' 'procedural Fairness' 'implied Contract' 'estoppel']

['arbitration' 'commercial Law' 'property Law' 'agricultural Tenancies'] ['leave to Appeal From Arbitrator' 'manifest Error of Law' 'procedural Fairness' 'implied Contract' 'estoppel']

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

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal From Arbitration / Application for Leave to Appeal; Judgment

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether there was a manifest error of law on the face of the award by the arbitrator' 'Whether there was strong evidence of an error of law by the arbitrator' 'Whether procedural fairness was denied to the plaintiff' 'Whether an implied tenancy or estoppel arose in favour of the plaintiff']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed; costs awarded to defendant.

Orders

['The Summons is dismissed.' 'The plaintiff is to pay the costs of the Summons.' 'The Exhibits may be returned.']