Damjanovic v. Sharpe Hume & Co. (Services) Pty. Ltd, .Damjanofic v. York Agencies Pty. Ltd., Damjanovic v. Rosier & Ors, Damjanovic v. Z. Spehar, Damjanovic v. I. Spehar [2001] NSWCA 130

Damjanovic v. Sharpe Hume & Co. (Services) Pty. Ltd, .Damjanofic v. York Agencies Pty. Ltd., Damjanovic v. Rosier & Ors, Damjanovic v. Z. Spehar, Damjanovic v. I. Spehar [2001] NSWCA 130

Because the District Court decision dismissed the proceedings, was a judgment or order in an action, did not fall within any category in District Court Act s.127(2), and involved matters at issue of at least $100,000, the appeal lay as of right and leave to appeal was unnecessary. Since an application for leave had been filed within time when leave was not required, it was appropriate to grant any necessary extension of time for the appeal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 April 2001
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal From District Court Decision Dismissing Proceedings After Determination of a Separate Question of Fact / Court of Appeal on Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Declared that the appeal lies as of right; leave to appeal was unnecessary; procedural directions and costs orders made.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'appeal as of Right' 'district Court Appeals' 'separate Question' 'extension of Time' 'costs']
['civil Procedure' 'appeals'] ['leave to Appeal' 'appeal as of Right' 'district Court Appeals' 'separate Question' 'extension of Time' 'costs']

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 From District Court Decision Dismissing Proceedings After Determination of a Separate Question of Fact / Court of Appeal on Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal was necessary from a District Court decision dismissing proceedings after determination of a separate question of fact.' 'Whether any extension of time should be granted for filing the notice of appeal with appointment.' 'What procedural directions and costs order should be made on the application for leave.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the District Court decision dismissed the proceedings, was a judgment or order in an action, did not fall within any category in District Court Act s.127(2), and involved matters at issue of at least $100,000, the appeal lay as of right and leave to appeal was unnecessary. Since an application for leave had been filed within time when leave was not required, it was appropriate to grant any necessary extension of time for the appeal.

Court Disposition

Declared that the appeal lies as of right; leave to appeal was unnecessary; procedural directions and costs orders made.

Orders

  • ['Declare that there is an appeal as of right in this matter, conditional on an affidavit being filed verifying that at least $100,000 is in issue.' 'Extend the time for filing the notice of appeal with appointment until and including 3 May 2001.' 'Direct that notice of appearance be filed and served by those...