Golden v V’landys [2020] NSWCA 120

Golden v V’landys [2020] NSWCA 120

Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed appeal was hopeless and disclosed no arguable error justifying leave. The challenges to the 2011 decisions and the misfeasance claim were impermissible attempts to relitigate matters already determined in the 2013 proceedings and earlier appeal. The challenge to the 2017 trainer's licence refusal was commenced about 15 months out of time and, given the expiry of the licence period and the applicant's concession that declaratory relief alone would not enable him to resume business, lacked utility. The claims for declarations about alleged embezzlement or cover-up under the CHAPs scheme were not maintainable because they did not vindicate any...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal Against Decision Striking Out Statement of Claim and Dismissing Proceedings / Leave to Appeal From Supreme Court Common Law Division Judgment
Outcome
Summons seeking leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'strike Out of Statement of Claim' 'summary Dismissal' 'abuse of Process' 'res Judicata and Cause of Action Estoppel' 'judicial Review Time Limits' 'declaratory Relief' 'inutility of Relief' 'misfeasance in Public Office' "trainer's Licence"]
['civil Procedure' 'administrative Law' 'judicial Review'] ['leave to Appeal' 'strike Out of Statement of Claim' 'summary Dismissal' 'abuse of Process' 'res Judicata and Cause of Action Estoppel' 'judicial Review Time Limits' 'declaratory Relief' 'inutility of Relief' 'misfeasance in Public Office' "trainer's Licence"]

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

Application for Leave to Appeal Against Decision Striking Out Statement of Claim and Dismissing Proceedings / Leave to Appeal From Supreme Court Common Law Division Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal should be granted from the order striking out the 2018 statement of claim and dismissing the proceedings.' 'Whether claims challenging Racing NSW decisions in 2011 were an impermissible attempt to relitigate issues determined in earlier proceedings.' "Whether the challenge to Racing NSW's 7 February 2017 refusal of a trainer's licence was out of time and lacked utility." 'Whether declarations concerning alleged embezzlement or cover-up under the CHAPs scheme were maintainable by the applicant absent a private right.' 'Whether the claim for damages for misfeasance in public office was an abuse of process because it relitigated the earlier claim.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed appeal was hopeless and disclosed no arguable error justifying leave. The challenges to the 2011 decisions and the misfeasance claim were impermissible attempts to relitigate matters already determined in the 2013 proceedings and earlier appeal. The challenge to the 2017 trainer's licence refusal was commenced about 15 months out of time and, given the expiry of the licence period and the applicant's concession that declaratory relief alone would not enable him to resume business, lacked utility. The claims for declarations about alleged embezzlement or cover-up under the CHAPs scheme were not maintainable because they did not vindicate any...

Court Disposition

Summons seeking leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Summons seeking leave to appeal dismissed with costs.']