Sparke v Hay [2014] NSWCA 318

Sparke v Hay [2014] NSWCA 318

Both pending proceedings are deemed by transitional legislation to have been commenced in the Supreme Court. Even if leave to appeal is available, no basis is shown for granting leave; the matters are of no public importance and serious procedural and bias complaints by the applicants are unsupported by evidence. Both proceedings should be dismissed.

Parties
First Applicant: David Sparke; Second Applicant: Beeox Corporation Pty Ltd; Respondent: G Peter Hay
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 September 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Hearing and Determination of Deemed Appeals; Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
proceedings dismissed
Legal Topics
Transitional Provisions, Jurisdiction, Leave to Appeal, Industrial Relations Commission Proceedings, Apprenticeship Cancellation
Industrial Law Administrative Law Transitional Provisions Jurisdiction Leave to Appeal Industrial Relations Commission Proceedings Apprenticeship Cancellation

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Sparke

First Applicant

Beeox Corporation Pty Ltd

Second Applicant

G Peter Hay

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Hearing and Determination of Deemed Appeals; Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether pending proceedings before the Industrial Relations Commission are deemed to have been commenced in the Supreme Court under transitional provisions
  2. 2 Whether there is a right of appeal (subject to leave) following decisions of Boland J and Staff J
  3. 3 Whether leave to appeal should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

Both pending proceedings are deemed by transitional legislation to have been commenced in the Supreme Court. Even if leave to appeal is available, no basis is shown for granting leave; the matters are of no public importance and serious procedural and bias complaints by the applicants are unsupported by evidence. Both proceedings should be dismissed.

Court Disposition

proceedings dismissed

Orders

  • Proceedings IRC 754 of 2013 and IRC 957 of 2013 dismissed
  • No order as to costs