Unique Commercial Group Pty Ltd v Cusumano [2024] NSWCATAP 141

The application for summary dismissal is refused because, although the appeal grounds could have been articulated more clearly, there are reasonably arguable questions of law—particularly involving alleged 'no evidence' findings and limitation arguments—such that summary dismissal would not be warranted at this stage.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 23 July 2024
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Summary Dismissal Application on Appeal
Outcome: Application for summary dismissal of the appeal refused.
Legal Topics: ['summary Dismissal' 'appeals' 'jurisdiction' 'estoppel' 'limitation Periods' 'costs']

['administrative Law' 'building and Construction Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['summary Dismissal' 'appeals' 'jurisdiction' 'estoppel' 'limitation Periods' 'costs']

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

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Summary Dismissal Application on Appeal

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether the appeal should be summarily dismissed as frivolous, vexatious, misconceived, or lacking in substance under s 55(1)(b) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW)' "Whether the grounds of appeal raise questions of law, particularly regarding 'no evidence' and limitation period" 'Whether estoppel principles (from Henderson v Henderson and Anshun) apply to preclude the appellant from raising certain arguments' 'Whether Tribunal erred in findings about contracts and defects without evidence']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application for summary dismissal of the appeal refused.

Orders

['The application for summary dismissal of the appeal is refused.' "The costs of the application are to be the Appellant's costs in the appeal."]