Gibbs v Snart & Pelican Park (NSW) Pty Ltd [2016] NSWCATAP 55

Gibbs v Snart & Pelican Park (NSW) Pty Ltd [2016] NSWCATAP 55

The appellants failed to establish that the Tribunal's decision was not fair and equitable, against the weight of evidence, or that significant new evidence was not reasonably available at the time; the material adduced as new evidence was not significant, not shown to be unavailable earlier, and would not have assisted the appellants. The Tribunal properly exercised its discretion regarding the weight of evidence and procedural fairness, and no error or miscarriage of justice was demonstrated.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Internal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal; Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'weight of Evidence' 'new Evidence on Appeal' 'assignment of Residential Site Agreements' 'costs in Tribunal Proceedings']
['consumer Law' 'tribunal Procedure'] ['leave to Appeal' 'weight of Evidence' 'new Evidence on Appeal' 'assignment of Residential Site Agreements' 'costs in Tribunal Proceedings']

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

Internal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal; Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal erred in giving insufficient weight to evidence and displayed bias' 'Whether significant new evidence not reasonably available at trial should be admitted on appeal' 'Whether refusal to transfer the site agreement or interference with sale occurred in breach of the site agreement']

Ratio Decidendi

The appellants failed to establish that the Tribunal's decision was not fair and equitable, against the weight of evidence, or that significant new evidence was not reasonably available at the time; the material adduced as new evidence was not significant, not shown to be unavailable earlier, and would not have assisted the appellants. The Tribunal properly exercised its discretion regarding the weight of evidence and procedural fairness, and no error or miscarriage of justice was demonstrated.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal is refused' 'The appeal is dismissed' 'The appellants must pay the costs of the respondents as agreed or as assessed']