Goel v Limitless Plumbing and Drainage Pty Ltd [2025] NSWCATAP 43

Goel v Limitless Plumbing and Drainage Pty Ltd [2025] NSWCATAP 43

None of the grounds of appeal identified by Mr Goel raised a question of law or grounds sufficient for leave to appeal. There was no error identified in the exercise of the Tribunal’s discretion in extending time or in setting aside the order as required under the relevant statutory test. The appeal panel was not satisfied that a substantial miscarriage of justice would be suffered or that any error meeting appellate intervention thresholds had occurred.

Parties
Appellant: Sanjay Goel; Respondent: Limitless Plumbing and Drainage Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Internal Appeal / Decision on Leave to Appeal and Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Set Aside Decisions, Absence of Party, Civil and Administrative Tribunal Powers, Appeals Process
Administrative Law Civil Procedure Extension of Time Set Aside Decisions Absence of Party Civil and Administrative Tribunal Powers Appeals Process

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 4 Authorities cited 37 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sanjay Goel

Appellant

Limitless Plumbing and Drainage Pty Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Internal Appeal / Decision on Leave to Appeal and Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted from Tribunal decisions extending time to file a set aside application and setting aside a money order made in the absence of a party
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal erred in its discretionary decisions under clause 9 of the Regulation and section 41 of the NCAT Act

Ratio Decidendi

None of the grounds of appeal identified by Mr Goel raised a question of law or grounds sufficient for leave to appeal. There was no error identified in the exercise of the Tribunal’s discretion in extending time or in setting aside the order as required under the relevant statutory test. The appeal panel was not satisfied that a substantial miscarriage of justice would be suffered or that any error meeting appellate intervention thresholds had occurred.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to appeal is refused.
  • The appeal is dismissed.