Katsonis v Al Moussawi [2023] NSWCATAP 318

Katsonis v Al Moussawi [2023] NSWCATAP 318

The Appeal Panel held that the landlord had not established any error on a question of law because any failure to attend the first instance hearing was a matter between the landlord and his agent, and the presiding member had considered the alleged breaches through assessment of the seven compensation claims. The Panel was also not satisfied that the decision was not fair and equitable, against the weight of evidence, or that there was significant new evidence not reasonably available at the first instance hearing. Leave to appeal was therefore refused and the appeal dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 December 2023
Procedural Posture
Internal Appeal Under S 80(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (nsw) / Appeal Panel Hearing Against a Consumer and Commercial Division Decision
Outcome
Pellie Katsonis was removed as an appellant, leave to appeal was refused, and the appeal was dismissed.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'question of Law' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice' 'residential Tenancy Compensation Claim' 'new Evidence on Appeal']
['civil and Administrative Tribunal Appeals' 'residential Tenancy'] ['leave to Appeal' 'question of Law' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice' 'residential Tenancy Compensation Claim' 'new Evidence on Appeal']

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 Under S 80(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (nsw) / Appeal Panel Hearing Against a Consumer and Commercial Division Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the appellant established an error on a question of law in the Tribunal's decision." 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted on the basis that the decision was not fair and equitable, was against the weight of evidence, or significant new evidence had arisen.' 'Whether Pellie Katsonis should remain named as an appellant.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Panel held that the landlord had not established any error on a question of law because any failure to attend the first instance hearing was a matter between the landlord and his agent, and the presiding member had considered the alleged breaches through assessment of the seven compensation claims. The Panel was also not satisfied that the decision was not fair and equitable, against the weight of evidence, or that there was significant new evidence not reasonably available at the first instance hearing. Leave to appeal was therefore refused and the appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Pellie Katsonis was removed as an appellant, leave to appeal was refused, and the appeal was dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Pellie Katsonis is removed as an appellant.' 'Leave to appeal is refused.' 'The appeal is dismissed.']