Koma v CTTT & Anor [2007] NSWSC 110

Koma v CTTT & Anor [2007] NSWSC 110

The Tribunal Member took into account the relevant factors, including the parties' prior agreements about how the hearing would proceed, the plaintiff's earlier expert evidence position, the prejudice to Brunet, and the possibility of action against former solicitors, and it was open to him to refuse leave to amend. The plaintiff had legal representation and an interpreter and was given an opportunity to argue why amendment should be allowed, so there was no denial of procedural fairness and no error of law.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 February 2007
Procedural Posture
Appeal and Summons Seeking Declaratory Relief and Certiorari in Relation to Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Orders / Supreme Court Determination of Appeal From Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Directions Refusing Leave to Amend Claim
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; summons dismissed; Tribunal orders affirmed; plaintiff ordered to pay defendants' costs as agreed or assessed.
Legal Topics
['appeal on Question of Law' 'procedural Fairness' 'amendment of Documents in Tribunal Proceedings' 'jurisdiction of the Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal' 'home Building Dispute']
['administrative Law' 'consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Law' 'civil Procedure' 'building and Construction'] ['appeal on Question of Law' 'procedural Fairness' 'amendment of Documents in Tribunal Proceedings' 'jurisdiction of the Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal' 'home Building Dispute']

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

Appeal and Summons Seeking Declaratory Relief and Certiorari in Relation to Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Orders / Supreme Court Determination of Appeal From Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Directions Refusing Leave to Amend Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Tribunal misconstrued or misapplied s 32 of the Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Act 2001 (NSW) by refusing to permit amendment of the plaintiff's documents." 'Whether the Tribunal misconstrued s 35 of the Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Act 2001 (NSW) by denying the plaintiff a reasonable opportunity to present his case.' 'Whether the Tribunal constructively failed to exercise jurisdiction or made an error of law by refusing to entertain further allegations of building defects.' 'Whether the plaintiff was denied procedural fairness when leave to amend was refused after earlier directions for amended material and expert reports.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal Member took into account the relevant factors, including the parties' prior agreements about how the hearing would proceed, the plaintiff's earlier expert evidence position, the prejudice to Brunet, and the possibility of action against former solicitors, and it was open to him to refuse leave to amend. The plaintiff had legal representation and an interpreter and was given an opportunity to argue why amendment should be allowed, so there was no denial of procedural fairness and no error of law.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; summons dismissed; Tribunal orders affirmed; plaintiff ordered to pay defendants' costs as agreed or assessed.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.' 'The summons filed 25 November 2005 is dismissed.' 'The orders of Senior Tribunal Member Durie dated 28 October 2005 are affirmed.' "The plaintiff is to pay the defendants' costs as agreed or assessed."]