Altaranesi v Sydney Local Health District [2012] NSWCA 69

Altaranesi v Sydney Local Health District [2012] NSWCA 69

The applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable error of law in the Appeal Panel's substantive decision or its refusal to reconsider the merits, and the proposed appeal therefore did not justify an extension of time. The challenge to the costs decision also failed because the Appeal Panel was entitled to assess costs by reference to the arguments presented to it and the unreasonable prolongation of proceedings; the President applied the substance of s 88 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 (NSW), and any wrong ascription of that provision to the Privacy Act was immaterial.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 April 2012
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal From Decisions of the Appeal Panel of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal / Court of Appeal Determination of Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for extension of time dismissed; leave to appeal from the costs decision refused; applicant ordered to pay the second respondent's costs in the Court of Appeal.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time to Appeal' 'leave to Appeal' 'appeal on a Question of Law' 'administrative Decisions Tribunal' 'health Records and Privacy' 'discretionary Costs Orders']
['administrative Law' 'appeals' 'privacy Law' 'costs'] ['extension of Time to Appeal' 'leave to Appeal' 'appeal on a Question of Law' 'administrative Decisions Tribunal' 'health Records and Privacy' 'discretionary Costs Orders']

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

Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal From Decisions of the Appeal Panel of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal / Court of Appeal Determination of Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether an extension of time should be granted to appeal from the Appeal Panel's substantive decision of 18 March 2011." 'Whether the proposed substantive appeal disclosed any arguable error of law by the Appeal Panel.' "Whether leave should be granted to appeal from the Appeal Panel's costs decision of 28 September 2011." 'Whether the Appeal Panel could award costs without reviewing the merits of the underlying case.' 'Whether any error in referring to the source of the costs power affected the validity of the costs order.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to demonstrate any arguable error of law in the Appeal Panel's substantive decision or its refusal to reconsider the merits, and the proposed appeal therefore did not justify an extension of time. The challenge to the costs decision also failed because the Appeal Panel was entitled to assess costs by reference to the arguments presented to it and the unreasonable prolongation of proceedings; the President applied the substance of s 88 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 (NSW), and any wrong ascription of that provision to the Privacy Act was immaterial.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time dismissed; leave to appeal from the costs decision refused; applicant ordered to pay the second respondent's costs in the Court of Appeal.

Orders

  • ['Dismiss the application for an extension of time to appeal the decision of the Appeal Panel of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal given on 18.03.2011.' 'Refuse leave to appeal from the decision as to costs of the Appeal Panel of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal given on 28.09.2011.' 'The applicant is to...