Foremost Electrical Pty Ltd v Moore [2018] NSWCATAP 82

Foremost Electrical Pty Ltd v Moore [2018] NSWCATAP 82

The Appeal Panel extended time because the delay was only one day, an acceptable reason was given, the grounds were not unarguable, no relevant prejudice was identified, and the interests of justice did not require refusal. Leave to appeal was refused because no arguable error of law was identified and the contractor did not show that the Tribunal's finding about insufficient particulars of labour charges was against the weight of the evidence or not fair and equitable. The invoice gave only dates, hours and rates for labour and no description of work performed on each day; in the circumstances, the contractor failed to show a substantial miscarriage of justice or grounds warranting leave.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Internal Appeal From a Decision of the Consumer and Commercial Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Concerning Payment for Electrical Work / Appeal Panel Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Time for filing the Notice of Appeal was extended, leave to appeal was refused, and the appeal was otherwise dismissed.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'extension of Time' 'itemised Invoice' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice' 'oral Contract']
['practice and Procedure' 'consumer and Commercial' 'home Building and Construction Payment Dispute'] ['leave to Appeal' 'extension of Time' 'itemised Invoice' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice' 'oral 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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Internal Appeal From a Decision of the Consumer and Commercial Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Concerning Payment for Electrical Work / Appeal Panel Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether time for filing the Notice of Appeal should be extended.' 'Whether the appellant identified an arguable error of law.' "Whether leave to appeal should be granted on the basis that the Tribunal's decision was not fair and equitable or was against the weight of the evidence." 'Whether the Tribunal erred in finding that the contractor failed to provide reasonable particulars of the labour charges claimed.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Panel extended time because the delay was only one day, an acceptable reason was given, the grounds were not unarguable, no relevant prejudice was identified, and the interests of justice did not require refusal. Leave to appeal was refused because no arguable error of law was identified and the contractor did not show that the Tribunal's finding about insufficient particulars of labour charges was against the weight of the evidence or not fair and equitable. The invoice gave only dates, hours and rates for labour and no description of work performed on each day; in the circumstances, the contractor failed to show a substantial miscarriage of justice or grounds warranting leave.

Court Disposition

Time for filing the Notice of Appeal was extended, leave to appeal was refused, and the appeal was otherwise dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The time for filing the Notice of Appeal is extended to 8 December 2017.' 'Leave to appeal is refused.' 'The appeal is otherwise dismissed.']