Shivanbodhiselvan v Norwest Gateway Pty Ltd [2022] NSWCATAP 27

Shivanbodhiselvan v Norwest Gateway Pty Ltd [2022] NSWCATAP 27

The Appeal Panel dismissed the appeal insofar as it raised errors of law because the appellant was given a reasonable opportunity to be heard, the Member's conduct did not deny procedural fairness, the appellant bore the onus of proof, and there was no error in applying the Anshun principle. Leave to appeal was refused because the appellant did not establish that the decision was not fair and equitable, against the weight of the evidence, or affected by significant new evidence, and no issue of principle, public importance, reasonably clear injustice, plain central error, clearly mistaken factual error, or unfair fact-finding process warranted leave.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Building and Construction Home Building Appeal / Appeal Panel Appeal From Consumer and Commercial Division Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed to the extent it raised errors of law; leave to appeal refused to the extent it raised errors other than errors of law.
Legal Topics
['procedural Fairness' 'anshun Estoppel' 'leave to Appeal' 'weight of Evidence' 'home Building Defects']
['building and Construction' 'civil Procedure' 'administrative Law'] ['procedural Fairness' 'anshun Estoppel' 'leave to Appeal' 'weight of Evidence' 'home Building Defects']

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

Building and Construction Home Building Appeal / Appeal Panel Appeal From Consumer and Commercial Division Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appellant was denied procedural fairness in the Tribunal hearing.' 'Whether the Tribunal made an error of law by applying Port of Melbourne Authority v Anshun Pty Ltd [1981] HCA 45.' 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted on grounds that the decision was not fair and equitable, was against the weight of the evidence, or significant new evidence had arisen.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Panel dismissed the appeal insofar as it raised errors of law because the appellant was given a reasonable opportunity to be heard, the Member's conduct did not deny procedural fairness, the appellant bore the onus of proof, and there was no error in applying the Anshun principle. Leave to appeal was refused because the appellant did not establish that the decision was not fair and equitable, against the weight of the evidence, or affected by significant new evidence, and no issue of principle, public importance, reasonably clear injustice, plain central error, clearly mistaken factual error, or unfair fact-finding process warranted leave.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed to the extent it raised errors of law; leave to appeal refused to the extent it raised errors other than errors of law.

Orders

  • ['To the extent that the appeal raises errors of law, the appeal is dismissed.' 'To the extent that the appeal raises errors other than errors of law, leave to appeal is refused.']