MPP Property Pty Ltd v Soliman Hospitality Pty Ltd [2021] NSWCATAP 90

MPP Property Pty Ltd v Soliman Hospitality Pty Ltd [2021] NSWCATAP 90

The Tribunal properly exercised its discretion in refusing the adjournment applications, as the evidence presented did not justify an adjournment, and no sufficient explanation for non-compliance or delay was provided; procedural fairness was not denied as the appellant was given a reasonable opportunity to be heard. Accordingly, no extension of time for appeal was warranted and the substantive and costs appeals were also dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 April 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal Panel Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['extension of Time' 'adjournment Applications' 'appeals' 'procedural Fairness']
['civil Procedure' 'tribunal Practice'] ['extension of Time' 'adjournment Applications' 'appeals' 'procedural Fairness']

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
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal Panel Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal erred in refusing adjournment applications on 1, 2, and 6 July 2020' 'Whether an extension of time to appeal those refusals should be granted' 'Whether there was a denial of procedural fairness under s 38(5) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW)' 'Whether the Tribunal erred in the substantive and costs decisions of 26 October 2020 and 27 January 2021']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal properly exercised its discretion in refusing the adjournment applications, as the evidence presented did not justify an adjournment, and no sufficient explanation for non-compliance or delay was provided; procedural fairness was not denied as the appellant was given a reasonable opportunity to be heard. Accordingly, no extension of time for appeal was warranted and the substantive and costs appeals were also dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application of the appellant for an extension of time in which to file the notice of appeal in so far as it relates to the refusals of the Tribunal on 1 July, 2 July and 6 July to adjourn the proceedings is refused, and the appeal is accordingly dismissed.' 'The application to appeal the decisions of the...