Leahy v Watermin Drillers Pty Ltd [2021] NSWCATAP 281

Leahy v Watermin Drillers Pty Ltd [2021] NSWCATAP 281

The appeal panel found that there was no substantial miscarriage of justice, no error in the Tribunal preferring the respondent's oral evidence over the appellant’s, no procedural unfairness as the appellant had opportunity to procure expert evidence but did not, and no evidence of bias; leave to appeal was refused and the appeal dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: Louis Leahy; Respondent: Watermin Drillers Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 September 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Determination of Appeal Against Tribunal Decision
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Appeal, Procedural Fairness, Bias, Contract Variation, Evidence, Expert Evidence, Natural Justice

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 4 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Louis Leahy

Appellant

Watermin Drillers Pty Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Determination of Appeal Against Tribunal Decision

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the Tribunal's decision
  2. 2 Whether Tribunal erred in preferring oral evidence of contractor over appellant's evidence
  3. 3 Whether appellant was denied natural justice due to lack of waterflow evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal panel found that there was no substantial miscarriage of justice, no error in the Tribunal preferring the respondent's oral evidence over the appellant’s, no procedural unfairness as the appellant had opportunity to procure expert evidence but did not, and no evidence of bias; leave to appeal was refused and the appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to Appeal is refused.
  • The Appeal is dismissed.