Forest v Suzanne [2022] NSWCATAP 188

Forest v Suzanne [2022] NSWCATAP 188

The appellant did not establish grounds for interlocutory orders under s 53 or s 64 of the NCAT Act, or that the respondent's allegations or material amounted to abuse of process. Section 53 did not justify striking out or redacting the respondent's documents before the appeal hearing; objections to relevance or admissibility should be addressed at the appeal hearing. The circumstances did not outweigh open justice or show a sufficient risk of harm to justify non-disclosure or non-publication under s 64. The appellant also failed to prove any collateral or improper purpose amounting to abuse of process.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Internal Appeal Under S 80(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 From Consumer and Commercial Division Residential Tenancies Proceedings / Interlocutory Application Seeking Orders Under S 64 And/or S 53 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013
Outcome
The appellant's interlocutory application was dismissed.
Legal Topics
['non Disclosure and Non Publication Orders' 'amendment or Striking Out of Documents' 'abuse of Process' 'open Justice' 'interlocutory Applications']
['administrative Law' 'residential Tenancies' 'civil Procedure'] ['non Disclosure and Non Publication Orders' 'amendment or Striking Out of Documents' 'abuse of Process' 'open Justice' 'interlocutory Applications']

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

Internal Appeal Under S 80(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 From Consumer and Commercial Division Residential Tenancies Proceedings / Interlocutory Application Seeking Orders Under S 64 And/or S 53 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Can an order be made under s 53 of the NCAT Act striking out documents the appellant objects to and, if so, should such an order be made?' "Should an order under s 64 be made in relation to the parties' names and/or the documents identified in the appellant's submissions?" "Does the respondent's provision of the documents the appellant objects to constitute an abuse of process?"]

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant did not establish grounds for interlocutory orders under s 53 or s 64 of the NCAT Act, or that the respondent's allegations or material amounted to abuse of process. Section 53 did not justify striking out or redacting the respondent's documents before the appeal hearing; objections to relevance or admissibility should be addressed at the appeal hearing. The circumstances did not outweigh open justice or show a sufficient risk of harm to justify non-disclosure or non-publication under s 64. The appellant also failed to prove any collateral or improper purpose amounting to abuse of process.

Court Disposition

The appellant's interlocutory application was dismissed.

Orders

  • ["The appellant's interlocutory application is dismissed." 'The Registrar is directed not to publish these reasons for decision on the Caselaw website before 6 July 2022.']