Barrett v Lee [2021] NSWCATAP 74

Barrett v Lee [2021] NSWCATAP 74

The appellant failed to demonstrate an arguable defence that could lead to a materially different result if the original decision were set aside and reheard. The Tribunal applied the correct legal principles, and no appealable error was shown in its discretionary refusal to set aside the orders made in the absence of the appellant.

Parties
Appellant: Keith Barrett; First Respondent: Maureen Lee; Second Respondent: Michelle Gomes
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Decision Made in Absence of a Party, Discretion to Set Aside Tribunal Orders, Appeal From Discretionary Decision, Covid 19 Related Tenancy Terminations

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Keith Barrett

Appellant

Maureen Lee

First Respondent

Michelle Gomes

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal Decision

  1. 1 Whether Tribunal erred in refusing to set aside a decision made in the absence of a party
  2. 2 Whether applicant had an arguable defence to original orders
  3. 3 Whether exercise of Tribunal’s discretion miscarried so as to justify appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant failed to demonstrate an arguable defence that could lead to a materially different result if the original decision were set aside and reheard. The Tribunal applied the correct legal principles, and no appealable error was shown in its discretionary refusal to set aside the orders made in the absence of the appellant.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.