Sky Above Roofing Pty Ltd v Lehmann-Monck [2023] NSWCATAP 335

Sky Above Roofing Pty Ltd v Lehmann-Monck [2023] NSWCATAP 335

Although the appellant raised a question of law by alleging denial of procedural fairness, the Tribunal made no error because the file supported the finding that notice of hearing had been issued to the appellant's registered office and email address and had not been returned. The appellant had not made an...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 December 2023
Procedural Posture
Internal Appeal From a Decision of the Consumer and Commercial Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal / Appeal Panel
Outcome
In so far as the appeal raises a question of law, the appeal is dismissed. In so far as the appeal raises other errors, leave to appeal is refused.
Legal Topics
['denial of Procedural Fairness' 'leave to Appeal' 'notice of Hearing' 'appeal on a Question of Law' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice']
['civil Procedure' 'administrative Law' 'consumer and Commercial'] ['denial of Procedural Fairness' 'leave to Appeal' 'notice of Hearing' 'appeal on a Question of Law' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice']

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 Decision of the Consumer and Commercial Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal / Appeal Panel

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appellant was denied procedural fairness because the Tribunal proceeded in its absence after it allegedly did not receive notice of the hearing.' 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted on grounds that the decision was not fair and equitable or was against the weight of the evidence.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the appellant raised a question of law by alleging denial of procedural fairness, the Tribunal made no error because the file supported the finding that notice of hearing had been issued to the appellant's registered office and email address and had not been returned. The appellant had not made an application to set aside or vary the decision under cl 9 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Regulation 2022 (NSW). Leave to appeal was refused because the fairness and weight-of-evidence grounds did not disclose a substantial miscarriage of justice, an issue of principle, a question of public importance, a reasonably clear injustice, or an unfair fact-finding process.

Court Disposition

In so far as the appeal raises a question of law, the appeal is dismissed. In so far as the appeal raises other errors, leave to appeal is refused.

Orders

  • ['In so far as the appeal raises a question of law, the appeal is dismissed.' 'In so far as the appeal raises other errors, leave to appeal is refused.']