Star Ocean Auto Mechanic Repairs v Yu [2021] NSWCATAP 84

Star Ocean Auto Mechanic Repairs v Yu [2021] NSWCATAP 84

Leave to appeal was refused because the new evidence proffered by the appellant was not significant to the issues in dispute and was, or should have been, reasonably available at the time of the first hearing. Thus, the requirements for leave to appeal on the basis of new evidence under cl 12(1)(c) of Sch 4 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) were not met, and there was no error of law or substantial miscarriage of justice.

Parties
Appellant: Star Ocean Auto Mechanic Repairs; Respondent: Yan Yu
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 April 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal Determination Before Appeal Panel
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Consumer Guarantees, Supply of Goods and Services, Appeal Procedure, Leave to Appeal, Significant New Evidence
Consumer Law Tribunal Procedure Consumer Guarantees Supply of Goods and Services Appeal Procedure Leave to Appeal Significant New Evidence

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Star Ocean Auto Mechanic Repairs

Appellant

Yan Yu

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal Determination Before Appeal Panel

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted based on significant new evidence under cl 12(1)(c) Sch 4 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether the new evidence was significant and not reasonably available at the time of hearing
  3. 3 Whether there was an error of law or substantial miscarriage of justice

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the new evidence proffered by the appellant was not significant to the issues in dispute and was, or should have been, reasonably available at the time of the first hearing. Thus, the requirements for leave to appeal on the basis of new evidence under cl 12(1)(c) of Sch 4 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) were not met, and there was no error of law or substantial miscarriage of justice.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal refused.
  • Appeal dismissed.