Watkins v Woolworths Limited [2017] NSWCATAP 125

Watkins v Woolworths Limited [2017] NSWCATAP 125

Neither actual nor apprehended bias was demonstrated by Mr Watkins, and no substantial miscarriage of justice or new evidence warranted leave to appeal. The evidentiary deficiencies identified at first instance were not remedied. Accordingly, leave to appeal was refused and the appeal dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal Panel Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; leave to appeal refused; extension of time granted.
Legal Topics
['bias' 'leave to Appeal' 'miscarriage of Justice' 'extension of Time' 'consumer Claims' 'evidentiary Deficiency']
['administrative Law' 'consumer Law'] ['bias' 'leave to Appeal' 'miscarriage of Justice' 'extension of Time' 'consumer Claims' 'evidentiary Deficiency']

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 / Appeal Panel Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether actual or apprehended bias was established' 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted due to miscarriage of justice' 'Whether evidentiary deficiencies warranted reconsideration']

Ratio Decidendi

Neither actual nor apprehended bias was demonstrated by Mr Watkins, and no substantial miscarriage of justice or new evidence warranted leave to appeal. The evidentiary deficiencies identified at first instance were not remedied. Accordingly, leave to appeal was refused and the appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; leave to appeal refused; extension of time granted.

Orders

  • ['Extend time for appeal to 28 September 2016' 'Leave to appeal is refused' 'The appeal is dismissed']