Marino v Di Blasio [2021] NSWCATAP 334

The application for extension of time is refused as no explanation was provided for late filing, and no merit or grounds for appeal were demonstrated; no error in the Tribunal's findings.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 29 October 2021
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Application for Extension of Time for Filing Notice of Appeal
Outcome: Application for extension of time refused
Legal Topics: ['residential Tenancies' 'rent' 'bond']

['leases and Tenancies'] ['residential Tenancies' 'rent' 'bond']

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

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Extension of Time for Filing Notice of Appeal

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether the Tribunal erred in finding the bond was $4,000 and not $6,600' 'Whether there was rent outstanding owed by the Tenant to the Landlord' 'Whether there was sufficient explanation for the late appeal']

Ratio Decidendi

The application for extension of time is refused as no explanation was provided for late filing, and no merit or grounds for appeal were demonstrated; no error in the Tribunal's findings.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time refused

Orders

['The application for an extension of time for the filing of the Notice of Appeal is refused.']