Bauskis v Wainhouse & Ors [2020] NSWCA 17
Leave to appeal is refused due to (i) the application not raising any question of principle, question of public importance, or reasonably clear injustice; (ii) a significant and unexplained delay in seeking leave; and (iii) the underlying claim and arguments being without merit or beyond what is merely arguable.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 20 February 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Leave to Appeal / Leave to Appeal (court of Appeal, NSW Supreme Court)
- Outcome
- Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
- Legal Topics
- ['application for Extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'jurisdiction of District Court' 'powers of Authorised Officers Under Companion Animals Act']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Leave to Appeal (court of Appeal, NSW Supreme Court)
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether leave to appeal should be granted after significant delay' 'Whether the District Court had jurisdiction to determine the claim without a jury' 'Whether a procedural error or lack of hearing occurred' 'Proper construction of s 69A of the Companion Animals Act 1998 (NSW) regarding entry to property']
Ratio Decidendi
Leave to appeal is refused due to (i) the application not raising any question of principle, question of public importance, or reasonably clear injustice; (ii) a significant and unexplained delay in seeking leave; and (iii) the underlying claim and arguments being without merit or beyond what is merely arguable.
Court Disposition
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Orders
- ['Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment