Denkov v Langov [2018] NSWCATAP 9

Denkov v Langov [2018] NSWCATAP 9

Leave to appeal was refused because Mr Denkov identified no arguable error of law, sought to rely on evidence and arguments that were available or could have been raised before the Tribunal, and otherwise merely sought to relitigate factual findings that were open to the Tribunal and not against the weight of the evidence. The Appeal Panel was not satisfied that the Tribunal's decision was wrong, involved an issue of principle, or caused any substantial miscarriage of justice.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 January 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal From a Decision of the Consumer and Commercial Division of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal in Home Building Proceedings / Application for Leave to Appeal Before the Appeal Panel
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed; stay lifted.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'questions of Law' 'fresh Evidence on Appeal' 'new Arguments on Appeal' 'defective and Incomplete Residential Building Work' 'builder Under the Home Building Act 1989' 'costs in Internal Appeals']
['administrative Law' 'home Building' 'civil Procedure'] ['leave to Appeal' 'questions of Law' 'fresh Evidence on Appeal' 'new Arguments on Appeal' 'defective and Incomplete Residential Building Work' 'builder Under the Home Building Act 1989' 'costs in Internal Appeals']

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 a Decision of the Consumer and Commercial Division of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal in Home Building Proceedings / Application for Leave to Appeal Before the Appeal Panel

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether leave to appeal should be granted from the Tribunal's decision." 'Whether the appeal raised any arguable question of law.' 'Whether Mr Denkov could rely on evidence that was not before the Tribunal.' 'Whether Mr Denkov could raise arguments on appeal that were not argued before the Tribunal.' "Whether the Tribunal's findings that Mr Denkov was the builder and liable for defective building work were open on the evidence." "Whether the Tribunal's decision was against the weight of evidence, unfair and equitable, or occasioned a substantial miscarriage of justice."]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because Mr Denkov identified no arguable error of law, sought to rely on evidence and arguments that were available or could have been raised before the Tribunal, and otherwise merely sought to relitigate factual findings that were open to the Tribunal and not against the weight of the evidence. The Appeal Panel was not satisfied that the Tribunal's decision was wrong, involved an issue of principle, or caused any substantial miscarriage of justice.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed; stay lifted.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal is refused.' 'The appeal is dismissed.' 'The stay of the order of the Tribunal is lifted.']