Rainima v GE Mortgage Solutions Ltd (No 2) [2011] NSWCA 393

Rainima v GE Mortgage Solutions Ltd (No 2) [2011] NSWCA 393

Leave to appeal was refused because Ms Rainima had a right of appeal which she did not exercise and her submissions disclosed no arguable error in Fullerton J's conduct of the hearing, no arguable apparent bias, no basis for a s 78B Judiciary Act notice, and no prospects of success on appeal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Judgment Dated 1 July 2011 of Fullerton J
Outcome
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'appeal as of Right Not Exercised' 'proceeding in Absence of Party' 'courtroom Assistance by Non Lawyer' 'apparent Bias' 'judiciary Act S 78 B Notice']
['appeals' 'civil Procedure' 'mortgage and Possession Proceedings'] ['leave to Appeal' 'appeal as of Right Not Exercised' 'proceeding in Absence of Party' 'courtroom Assistance by Non Lawyer' 'apparent Bias' 'judiciary Act S 78 B Notice']

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 / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Judgment Dated 1 July 2011 of Fullerton J

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal should be granted where the applicant had an entitlement to appeal as of right and did not exercise it.' "Whether Fullerton J erred by allowing the hearing to proceed in Ms Rainima's absence." 'Whether Fullerton J erred by ordering Mr McClure to leave the bar table and subsequently be removed from the court.' 'Whether Fullerton J displayed apparent bias against Ms Rainima.' 'Whether the hearing should have been adjourned to enable a notice under s 78B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) to be given.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because Ms Rainima had a right of appeal which she did not exercise and her submissions disclosed no arguable error in Fullerton J's conduct of the hearing, no arguable apparent bias, no basis for a s 78B Judiciary Act notice, and no prospects of success on appeal.

Court Disposition

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ["Ms Rainima's application for leave to appeal be dismissed with costs."]