Wang v State of New South Wales [2020] NSWCA 21

Wang v State of New South Wales [2020] NSWCA 21

Leave to appeal was refused because none of the proposed appeal grounds had merit: the challenge to Adamson J's orders was otiose because the relevant dates had passed; the challenge to Harrison J's 2014 order was long out of time, had previously been refused, and disclosed no error; the State's late Notice of Appearance did not make later proceedings illegal and time had been extended; no error was identified in Harrison AsJ's stay order; and allegations that respondents' lawyers misled the judges were unsupported by evidence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Court of Appeal Application for Leave to Appeal Against Interlocutory Procedural Decisions
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'tutor Conducting Proceedings Without a Solicitor' 'uniform Civil Procedure Rules R 7.14(2)' 'stay of Proceedings' 'summary Judgment and Strike Out Motions' 'costs']
['civil Procedure' 'appellate Procedure'] ['leave to Appeal' 'tutor Conducting Proceedings Without a Solicitor' 'uniform Civil Procedure Rules R 7.14(2)' 'stay of Proceedings' 'summary Judgment and Strike Out Motions' '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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal / Court of Appeal Application for Leave to Appeal Against Interlocutory Procedural Decisions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether leave should be granted to appeal from Adamson J's orders refusing to bring forward a hearing date and limiting further applications before 31 October 2019." "Whether leave should be granted to challenge Harrison J's refusal to permit the applicant's tutor to conduct proceedings without a solicitor under r 7.14(2) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules." "Whether Harrison AsJ erred in staying the proceedings against the State of New South Wales until the applicant's tutor complied with orders that the tutor be represented by a lawyer." 'Whether alleged lateness in the State of New South Wales filing a Notice of Appearance rendered subsequent proceedings illegal.' 'Whether lawyers for the respondents intentionally misled the primary judges and should pay costs.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because none of the proposed appeal grounds had merit: the challenge to Adamson J's orders was otiose because the relevant dates had passed; the challenge to Harrison J's 2014 order was long out of time, had previously been refused, and disclosed no error; the State's late Notice of Appearance did not make later proceedings illegal and time had been extended; no error was identified in Harrison AsJ's stay order; and allegations that respondents' lawyers misled the judges were unsupported by evidence.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.']