McNeill v Avalon Surf Lifesaving Club [2014] NSWCA 167

McNeill v Avalon Surf Lifesaving Club [2014] NSWCA 167

The appeal was dismissed because the notice of intention to appeal and notice of appeal had not been served and filed within the required time limits, no explanation or application for an extension of time was before the Court, and the notice of appeal did not disclose any basis on which the appeal had prospects of success. Once the appeal was dismissed as against Pittwater Council, there was no utility in the appeal proceeding against the Club.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal From the Land and Environment Court; Interlocutory Application for Summary Dismissal / Hearing of the Second Respondent's Notice of Motion Seeking Summary Dismissal of the Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['appeal Procedure' 'summary Dismissal' 'non Compliance With Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (nsw)' 'class 4 Land and Environment Court Proceedings']
['civil Procedure' 'planning and Environment'] ['appeal Procedure' 'summary Dismissal' 'non Compliance With Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (nsw)' 'class 4 Land and Environment Court Proceedings']

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 From the Land and Environment Court; Interlocutory Application for Summary Dismissal / Hearing of the Second Respondent's Notice of Motion Seeking Summary Dismissal of the Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appeal should be dismissed summarily as incompetent because the notice of intention to appeal and notice of appeal were not filed and served within the time required by the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW).' 'Whether the appeal should alternatively be dismissed summarily because the proceedings disclosed no reasonable cause of action.' 'Whether there was any utility in the appeal proceeding against the first respondent if the appeal was dismissed as against the second respondent.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the notice of intention to appeal and notice of appeal had not been served and filed within the required time limits, no explanation or application for an extension of time was before the Court, and the notice of appeal did not disclose any basis on which the appeal had prospects of success. Once the appeal was dismissed as against Pittwater Council, there was no utility in the appeal proceeding against the Club.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed.' 'Appellant pay the costs of the second respondent.']