BROADHURST v WILLIAMS [1989] NSWCA 26

BROADHURST v WILLIAMS [1989] NSWCA 26

The appellant's notice of appeal was procedurally defective as it failed to identify the part of the decision challenged, lacked specificity in the grounds, and did not set out precise orders sought. The defects, however, do not justify striking out the appeal; instead, the appellant is directed to file a compliant amended notice.

Parties
Appellant: Hugh Broadhurst; Respondent: John Williams
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 March 1989
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Procedural Directions in Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appellant directed to file amended grounds of appeal within 14 days; costs in the appeal; liberty to apply.
Legal Topics
Notice of Appeal, Compliance With Procedural Rules
Civil Procedure Notice of Appeal Compliance With Procedural Rules

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hugh Broadhurst

Appellant

John Williams

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Procedural Directions in Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the notice of appeal complied with Pt 51 r 8; what procedural directions should be given given non-compliance

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant's notice of appeal was procedurally defective as it failed to identify the part of the decision challenged, lacked specificity in the grounds, and did not set out precise orders sought. The defects, however, do not justify striking out the appeal; instead, the appellant is directed to file a compliant amended notice.

Court Disposition

Appellant directed to file amended grounds of appeal within 14 days; costs in the appeal; liberty to apply.

Orders

  • Proponent to file amended grounds of appeal within 14 days.
  • Liberty to apply on two days' notice to the other party.