Chi v Roger Fuller Pty Limited [2018] NSWCATAP 95

Chi v Roger Fuller Pty Limited [2018] NSWCATAP 95

No error of law, procedural unfairness, bias, or jurisdictional error was established. The grounds advanced by the appellant lacked credible evidence and substance, and there was no substantial miscarriage of justice. Accordingly, leave to appeal was refused and the appeal dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Substantive Appeal Determination
Outcome
Leave to appeal on a question other than an error of law is refused; the appeal is dismissed.
Legal Topics
['error of Law' 'jurisdictional Error' 'procedural Fairness' 'bias' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'consumer Claim' 'adjournment Application']

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 / Leave to Appeal and Substantive Appeal Determination

  1. 1 ['Whether there was an error of law by the Tribunal' 'Whether there was a denial of procedural fairness' 'Whether there was actual or apprehended bias' 'Whether there was a jurisdictional error' 'Whether decision was against the weight of evidence or involved significant new evidence' 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted']

Ratio Decidendi

No error of law, procedural unfairness, bias, or jurisdictional error was established. The grounds advanced by the appellant lacked credible evidence and substance, and there was no substantial miscarriage of justice. Accordingly, leave to appeal was refused and the appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal on a question other than an error of law is refused; the appeal is dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal on a question other than an error of law is refused.' 'The appeal is dismissed.' 'If the respondent makes an application for costs, such application is to be made in the manner set out in paragraph [64] of this decision.']