KERRIE ANNE BROCKWELL v CARMEL JEWEL BROWN [1990] NSWCA 31

KERRIE ANNE BROCKWELL v CARMEL JEWEL BROWN [1990] NSWCA 31

Extension of time to appeal granted as the delay was only one week, was satisfactorily explained, and no special prejudice was alleged or proven by the opponent.

Parties
Claimant: Kerrie Anne Brockwell; Opponent: Carmel Jewel Brown; Defendant: Marian Edith Cummins
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 March 1990
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal
Outcome
Extension of time to appeal granted, subject to terms.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time for Appeal, Costs, Appeals Process
Practice and Procedure Extension of Time for Appeal Costs Appeals Process

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kerrie Anne Brockwell

Claimant

Carmel Jewel Brown

Opponent

Marian Edith Cummins

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant should be granted an extension of time to appeal against the dismissal of the claim against Carmel Jewel Brown.

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time to appeal granted as the delay was only one week, was satisfactorily explained, and no special prejudice was alleged or proven by the opponent.

Court Disposition

Extension of time to appeal granted, subject to terms.

Orders

  • Time for lodging appeal in Brockwell v Brown extended until 20 February 1990; notice of appeal deemed within time.
  • Claimant to pay opponent's costs of and incidental to the motion.