Chandershekar v Hakim [2016] NSWCATAP 100

Chandershekar v Hakim [2016] NSWCATAP 100

The Appeal Panel refused an extension of time because the delay was considerable, the explanation for delay was not convincing, and the proposed appeal had no reasonable prospects of success or fairly arguable case. The Local Court proceedings had been resolved by agreement and were not pending on 2 July 2015, so clause 5(7) of Schedule 4 to the NCAT Act did not deprive the Tribunal of jurisdiction to make the consent orders. The Respondent would also suffer real prejudice if time were extended.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Internal Appeal in Home Building Proceedings / Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal and Appeal
Outcome
Application for extension of time refused; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['consent Orders' 'extension of Time for Internal Appeal' 'tribunal Jurisdiction' 'pending Court Proceedings' 'prospects of Success']
['home Building' 'civil Procedure' 'administrative Law'] ['consent Orders' 'extension of Time for Internal Appeal' 'tribunal Jurisdiction' 'pending Court Proceedings' 'prospects of Success']

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 in Home Building Proceedings / Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal and Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Appellant should be granted an extension of time under s41 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) to file the Notice of Appeal outside the 28 day period in Rule 25(4)(c) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2014 (NSW).' 'Whether the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to make the consent orders because the same dispute was pending in Parramatta Local Court within the meaning of clause 5(7) of Schedule 4 to the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW).' 'Whether the proposed appeal had reasonable prospects of success or a fairly arguable case.' 'Whether granting an extension of time would prejudice the Respondent.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Panel refused an extension of time because the delay was considerable, the explanation for delay was not convincing, and the proposed appeal had no reasonable prospects of success or fairly arguable case. The Local Court proceedings had been resolved by agreement and were not pending on 2 July 2015, so clause 5(7) of Schedule 4 to the NCAT Act did not deprive the Tribunal of jurisdiction to make the consent orders. The Respondent would also suffer real prejudice if time were extended.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time refused; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application for an extension of time within which to file the Notice of Appeal is refused.' 'The Appeal is dismissed.']