Shapkin v The University of Sydney [2024] NSWCA 156

Shapkin v The University of Sydney [2024] NSWCA 156

Leave to appeal refused as grounds did not raise any issue of principle, question of public importance, or have sufficient prospects; judicial review refused as applicant had an equally effective and convenient remedy in appeal proceedings; staying judicial review proceedings was appropriate and no procedural unfairness occurred.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal and Judicial Review Proceedings / Application for Leave to Appeal and Associated Judicial Review; Orders on Leave to Appeal and Costs
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; proceedings dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'judicial Review' 'residential Tenancies' 'procedural Fairness']
['administrative Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['leave to Appeal' 'judicial Review' 'residential Tenancies' '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 and Judicial Review Proceedings / Application for Leave to Appeal and Associated Judicial Review; Orders on Leave to Appeal and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal should be granted' 'Whether refusal to conduct judicial review under s 34(1)(c) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) miscarried' 'Whether primary judge misapplied principle in Wishart v Fraser (1941) 64 CLR 470; [1941] HCA 8' "Whether primary judge erred in staying applicant's judicial review summons" 'Whether procedural fairness was denied']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal refused as grounds did not raise any issue of principle, question of public importance, or have sufficient prospects; judicial review refused as applicant had an equally effective and convenient remedy in appeal proceedings; staying judicial review proceedings was appropriate and no procedural unfairness occurred.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; proceedings dismissed with costs

Orders

  • ['The summons seeking leave to appeal is dismissed.' "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs."]