Florida Kitchens Centre Pty Ltd v Keith (No 2) [2016] NSWCATAP 61

Florida Kitchens Centre Pty Ltd v Keith (No 2) [2016] NSWCATAP 61

Leave to appeal was refused because the challenged orders were case management directions for preparation of the proceedings for hearing, substantially similar to earlier inspection directions for which leave to appeal had already been refused, and Florida Kitchen Centre showed no error of principle, special circumstance, irreversible prejudice or risk of substantial injustice. The complaints of bias, lack of reasons, irrelevance, inconvenience and trade secrets were not substantiated or could be addressed at the final hearing, by confidentiality undertakings, or by costs. Special circumstances justified costs because Florida Kitchen Centre delayed bringing the appeal and stay...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Interlocutory Procedural Directions in a Home Building Dispute / Application for Leave to Appeal and Costs Determination
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused and appeal dismissed; appellant ordered to pay the respondent's costs as agreed or assessed.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Decision' 'procedural Directions' 'inspection of Manufacturing Facility' 'case Management' 'special Circumstances for Costs']
['civil and Administrative Law' 'home Building' 'costs'] ['leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Decision' 'procedural Directions' 'inspection of Manufacturing Facility' 'case Management' 'special Circumstances for 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 From Interlocutory Procedural Directions in a Home Building Dispute / Application for Leave to Appeal and Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether leave should be granted to appeal procedural directions requiring access to Florida Kitchen Centre's manufacturing facility for expert inspection." 'Whether the directions involved error of law, apprehended bias, lack of reasons, irrelevance, commercial prejudice or risk to trade secrets.' 'Whether special circumstances warranted a costs order against Florida Kitchen Centre.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the challenged orders were case management directions for preparation of the proceedings for hearing, substantially similar to earlier inspection directions for which leave to appeal had already been refused, and Florida Kitchen Centre showed no error of principle, special circumstance, irreversible prejudice or risk of substantial injustice. The complaints of bias, lack of reasons, irrelevance, inconvenience and trade secrets were not substantiated or could be addressed at the final hearing, by confidentiality undertakings, or by costs. Special circumstances justified costs because Florida Kitchen Centre delayed bringing the appeal and stay...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused and appeal dismissed; appellant ordered to pay the respondent's costs as agreed or assessed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal refused.' 'Appeal dismissed.' "Florida Kitchen Centre to pay Mr Keith's costs of the appeal as agreed or assessed in accordance with s 60(4)(b) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW)."]