PETER PAPAPETROS v CARMELLO MAZZA [1989] NSWCA 160

PETER PAPAPETROS v CARMELLO MAZZA [1989] NSWCA 160

The Court found the arbitrators had addressed the issue raised in par 2.1, and there was no sufficient basis to challenge Brownie J's finding that the 'no consideration issue' was not before the arbitrators. Accordingly, there was no basis for leave to appeal.

Parties
Applicant: Peter Papapetros; Respondent: Carmello Mazza
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 July 1989
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Arbitration, Leave to Appeal, Consideration, Variation of Contract
Civil Procedure Arbitration Leave to Appeal Consideration Variation of Contract

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Papapetros

Applicant

Carmello Mazza

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrators failed to deal with an issue posed in their award (par 2.1)
  2. 2 Whether there was consideration to support a variation of the original contract and whether this issue was before the arbitrators

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found the arbitrators had addressed the issue raised in par 2.1, and there was no sufficient basis to challenge Brownie J's finding that the 'no consideration issue' was not before the arbitrators. Accordingly, there was no basis for leave to appeal.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.