Rodny v Stricke (No 2) [2020] NSWSC 1126

Rodny v Stricke (No 2) [2020] NSWSC 1126

Although the delay in filing the summons was satisfactorily explained as the fault of Mr Rodny's solicitor and an extension of time was granted on the basis of a personal costs order against the solicitor, leave to appeal was refused because the proposed grounds challenged factual findings and the exercise of a discretionary costs power, did not raise an issue of principle or question of public importance, and did not show a reasonably clear injustice or error by the Appeal Panel in finding special circumstances under s 60 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal From a Costs Decision of the Appeal Panel of the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal / Amended Notice of Motion and Summons Before the Supreme Court of New South Wales
Outcome
Extension of time granted; leave to appeal refused; summons dismissed; plaintiff ordered to pay defendants' costs.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time to File Summons' 'leave to Appeal From NCAT Appeal Panel' 'costs in NCAT Proceedings' 'special Circumstances Under S 60 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (nsw)' 'appeal From Discretionary Costs Decision']
['practice and Procedure' 'civil Procedure' 'costs' 'administrative Law' 'strata Schemes'] ['extension of Time to File Summons' 'leave to Appeal From NCAT Appeal Panel' 'costs in NCAT Proceedings' 'special Circumstances Under S 60 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (nsw)' 'appeal From Discretionary Costs Decision']

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 Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal From a Costs Decision of the Appeal Panel of the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal / Amended Notice of Motion and Summons Before the Supreme Court of New South Wales

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an extension of time should be granted to file the summons under the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW).' 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted under s 83 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW).' 'Whether the proposed appeal raised a question of law, issue of principle, question of public importance, or reasonably clear injustice.' 'Whether the NCAT Appeal Panel erred in finding special circumstances warranting a costs order under s 60 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW).']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the delay in filing the summons was satisfactorily explained as the fault of Mr Rodny's solicitor and an extension of time was granted on the basis of a personal costs order against the solicitor, leave to appeal was refused because the proposed grounds challenged factual findings and the exercise of a discretionary costs power, did not raise an issue of principle or question of public importance, and did not show a reasonably clear injustice or error by the Appeal Panel in finding special circumstances under s 60 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW).

Court Disposition

Extension of time granted; leave to appeal refused; summons dismissed; plaintiff ordered to pay defendants' costs.

Orders

  • ['An extension of time to file the summons up to 30 April 2020 is granted.' "The plaintiff's solicitor is to personally pay the costs thrown away by reason of delay in complying with the orders of the Court on 13 February 2020." 'Leave to appeal is refused.' 'The summons filed 30 April 2020 is dismissed.' "The...