Ryan Stephen Trenholme t/as Trenholmes Constructions v Anthony Kurt Paltram [2015] NSWCATAP 36

Ryan Stephen Trenholme t/as Trenholmes Constructions v Anthony Kurt Paltram [2015] NSWCATAP 36

Because the Tribunal's reasons and file did not show that it considered or properly considered whether it could and should proceed ex parte against Mr Trenholme, or else failed to give reasons for doing so, appealable error was established and the first instance orders had to be set aside.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal From a Decision of the Consumer and Commercial Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal on a Money Claim / Appeal Panel
Outcome
Appeal allowed; first instance orders set aside; whole case to be reconsidered by the Tribunal.
Legal Topics
['proceeding Ex Parte' 'service of Notice of Hearing' 'duty to Give Reasons' 'appeal From Tribunal Decision' 'money Claim for Rendering Work']
['civil Procedure' 'administrative Law' 'consumer and Commercial Disputes'] ['proceeding Ex Parte' 'service of Notice of Hearing' 'duty to Give Reasons' 'appeal From Tribunal Decision' 'money Claim for Rendering Work']

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 From a Decision of the Consumer and Commercial Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal on a Money Claim / Appeal Panel

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Tribunal erred by proceeding in the absence of Mr Trenholme without properly considering the discretionary power to proceed ex parte under the Tribunal's rules." "Whether the Tribunal failed to give adequate reasons for proceeding in Mr Trenholme's absence." 'Whether the orders requiring payment to Mr Paltram should be set aside and the matter reconsidered.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the Tribunal's reasons and file did not show that it considered or properly considered whether it could and should proceed ex parte against Mr Trenholme, or else failed to give reasons for doing so, appealable error was established and the first instance orders had to be set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; first instance orders set aside; whole case to be reconsidered by the Tribunal.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is allowed.' 'The orders made by the Tribunal on 10 September 2014 as corrected on 22 September 2014 be set aside.' 'The whole of the case be reconsidered by the Tribunal.']