Reid & Robinson Builders Pty Limited trading as John Robinson Elite Constructions v Cleal [2021] NSWCATAP 348

Reid & Robinson Builders Pty Limited trading as John Robinson Elite Constructions v Cleal [2021] NSWCATAP 348

The appeal was out of time and the minor delay was not explained; leave to appeal was required as the order was interlocutory rather than ancillary; leave to appeal was refused because no injustice or clear error was established, and the substantive claim was at least arguable at law—there were disputed facts for trial and it was not plain that the claim was statute-barred.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 November 2021
Procedural Posture
Internal Appeal / Interlocutory Decision (application for Leave to Appeal and Extension of Time)
Outcome
appeal dismissed, leave to appeal refused, time to appeal not extended
Legal Topics
['appeals' 'extension of Time' 'jurisdiction' 'limitation Periods' 'transfer of Proceedings' 'statutory Interpretation']
['building and Construction Law' 'civil Procedure' 'consumer Law'] ['appeals' 'extension of Time' 'jurisdiction' 'limitation Periods' 'transfer of Proceedings' 'statutory Interpretation']

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 / Interlocutory Decision (application for Leave to Appeal and Extension of Time)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appeal was lodged within time and, if not, whether time to appeal should be extended' 'Whether the decision under appeal was interlocutory or ancillary for the purpose of the requirement for leave to appeal' 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted' 'Whether the Respondents’ claim in substantive proceedings is otherwise maintainable at law (i.e., not statute-barred)' 'Whether the proceedings should be transferred to the District Court or remain in the Tribunal']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was out of time and the minor delay was not explained; leave to appeal was required as the order was interlocutory rather than ancillary; leave to appeal was refused because no injustice or clear error was established, and the substantive claim was at least arguable at law—there were disputed facts for trial and it was not plain that the claim was statute-barred.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed, leave to appeal refused, time to appeal not extended

Orders

  • ['Time to appeal not extended.' 'Leave to appeal refused.' 'Appeal dismissed.' 'Any party seeking an order for costs must file and serve written submissions, not exceeding 5 pages in length, within 7 days of these orders.' 'Any party resisting an application for costs must file and serve written submissions, not...