Islam v Javam [2018] NSWSC 1430

Islam v Javam [2018] NSWSC 1430

Because the defendant conceded that the plaintiff was entitled to a $20,000 credit in the building dispute regardless of how the original payment was characterised, and because the amount in issue was modest and disproportionate to the costs incurred and likely to be incurred, the preferable course was not to determine the appeal immediately but to list the matter for directions so the parties could consider returning to the Tribunal to litigate the building dispute to finality, with the Supreme Court proceedings remaining on foot if needed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 September 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Local Court; Application for Leave to Appeal and Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time / Directions
Outcome
Matter listed for directions on Monday 22 October 2018.
Legal Topics
['appeal From Local Court' 'leave to Appeal' 'extension of Time' 'transfer of Proceedings to NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal' 'building Claims' 'proportionality of Litigation Costs']
['civil Procedure' 'home Building'] ['appeal From Local Court' 'leave to Appeal' 'extension of Time' 'transfer of Proceedings to NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal' 'building Claims' 'proportionality of Litigation Costs']

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 Local Court; Application for Leave to Appeal and Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time / Directions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether time should be extended for filing a summons seeking leave to appeal from the Local Court transfer order.' 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted from the Local Court order transferring the proceedings to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal.' "Whether the plaintiff's claim concerning the $20,000 payment created a jurisdictional problem for determination of the parties' building dispute in the Tribunal." 'Whether continuation of the appeal was proportionate and in the best interests of the parties.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the defendant conceded that the plaintiff was entitled to a $20,000 credit in the building dispute regardless of how the original payment was characterised, and because the amount in issue was modest and disproportionate to the costs incurred and likely to be incurred, the preferable course was not to determine the appeal immediately but to list the matter for directions so the parties could consider returning to the Tribunal to litigate the building dispute to finality, with the Supreme Court proceedings remaining on foot if needed.

Court Disposition

Matter listed for directions on Monday 22 October 2018.

Orders

  • ['The matter is listed before Harrison J for directions on Monday 22 October 2018.']