Yang v Webster [2018] NSWCATAP 293

Yang v Webster [2018] NSWCATAP 293

Leave to appeal was refused because no procedural unfairness or error of law was established, the tribunal member applied the balance of probabilities properly, and the findings regarding timing of robbery and quantification of loss were not against the weight of evidence or unfair.

Parties
Appellant: Mi Roo Yang; Appellant: Eddie Park; Respondent: Isabelle Webster
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal and Final Disposition
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Liability of Landlord and Agent for Loss of Property, Open Inspection, Onus of Proof

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mi Roo Yang

Appellant

Eddie Park

Appellant

Isabelle Webster

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal and Final Disposition

  1. 1 Whether there was denial of procedural fairness in the original proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the tribunal member correctly applied the onus of proof
  3. 3 Whether the finding that the robbery occurred after the inspection was against the weight of evidence

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because no procedural unfairness or error of law was established, the tribunal member applied the balance of probabilities properly, and the findings regarding timing of robbery and quantification of loss were not against the weight of evidence or unfair.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal refused.
  • Appeal dismissed.