PlumbCorp Group Pty Ltd v Paras [2021] NSWCATAP 207

PlumbCorp Group Pty Ltd v Paras [2021] NSWCATAP 207

The Appeal Panel refused leave because the appellant did not establish any error of law or satisfy the criteria for a substantial miscarriage of justice. The Tribunal was entitled to treat the Watertight invoice as persuasive factual evidence of what was observed and done, notwithstanding that it was not an expert...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 July 2021
Procedural Posture
Internal Appeal From a Consumer & Commercial Division Decision Concerning a Home Building/plumbing Services Dispute / Appeal Panel Determination of Leave to Appeal and Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused and appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'internal Appeals' 'expert Evidence' 'tribunal Not Bound by Rules of Evidence' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice' 'new Evidence on Appeal' 'assessment of Evidence']
['administrative Law' 'civil Procedure' 'consumer and Commercial Law' 'home Building'] ['leave to Appeal' 'internal Appeals' 'expert Evidence' 'tribunal Not Bound by Rules of Evidence' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice' 'new Evidence on Appeal' 'assessment of Evidence']

Source-derived case record

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 From a Consumer & Commercial Division Decision Concerning a Home Building/plumbing Services Dispute / Appeal Panel Determination of Leave to Appeal and Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal erred in relying on the Watertight Plumbing invoice although it was not an expert report complying with the Experts Code of Conduct.' 'Whether the Watertight Plumbing invoice was factual evidence or opinion evidence.' 'Whether the appellant should be permitted to rely on a Sydney Water service location diagram as new evidence on appeal.' 'Whether the appellant may have suffered a substantial miscarriage of justice warranting leave to appeal under clause 12 of Schedule 4 of the Civil & Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 NSW.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Panel refused leave because the appellant did not establish any error of law or satisfy the criteria for a substantial miscarriage of justice. The Tribunal was entitled to treat the Watertight invoice as persuasive factual evidence of what was observed and done, notwithstanding that it was not an expert report complying with the Experts Code of Conduct. The appellant did not seek to cross-examine Watertight, and the proposed Sydney Water diagram was not shown to have been unavailable at the first hearing or to be significant new evidence. The appellant's challenge was essentially to factual findings and evidentiary weight, which did not justify leave under clause 12 or Collins...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused and appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal refused.' 'Appeal dismissed.']