Abdishou v Hardy [2021] NSWCATAP 55

Abdishou v Hardy [2021] NSWCATAP 55

The Appeal Panel refused an extension of time because the appeal was filed 36 days after expiry of the prescribed time, the explanation for delay was unsupported by evidence, the respondent had experienced stress from the proceedings, and the proposed appeal had no sufficient prospects of success. The appellant did not provide a transcript or recording establishing procedural unfairness, had not shown that lack of an interpreter or telephone hearing denied him procedural fairness, was properly refused an adjournment after ample opportunity to provide expert evidence, and had not produced any new evidence. In the absence of independent expert evidence establishing that the fence was...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Internal Appeal From a Consumer and Commercial Division Home Building Decision / Application for Extension of Time to File Appeal and Appeal Decided on the Papers
Outcome
Application for an extension of time for the filing of the appeal refused; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time to Appeal' 'internal Appeals' 'procedural Fairness' 'residential Building Work' 'expert Evidence']
['administrative Law' 'civil Procedure' 'home Building'] ['extension of Time to Appeal' 'internal Appeals' 'procedural Fairness' 'residential Building Work' 'expert Evidence']

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 From a Consumer and Commercial Division Home Building Decision / Application for Extension of Time to File Appeal and Appeal Decided on the Papers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appellant should be granted an extension of time to file the appeal.' 'Whether the Tribunal denied the appellant procedural fairness in the conduct of the telephone hearing, including in relation to an interpreter, adjournment and opportunity to present his case.' 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted on the basis that the decision was not fair and equitable, was against the weight of evidence, or significant new evidence had arisen.' 'Whether the Tribunal erred in dismissing the home building application in the absence of expert evidence establishing defects.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Panel refused an extension of time because the appeal was filed 36 days after expiry of the prescribed time, the explanation for delay was unsupported by evidence, the respondent had experienced stress from the proceedings, and the proposed appeal had no sufficient prospects of success. The appellant did not provide a transcript or recording establishing procedural unfairness, had not shown that lack of an interpreter or telephone hearing denied him procedural fairness, was properly refused an adjournment after ample opportunity to provide expert evidence, and had not produced any new evidence. In the absence of independent expert evidence establishing that the fence was...

Court Disposition

Application for an extension of time for the filing of the appeal refused; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Application for an extension of time for the filing of the appeal refused.' 'Appeal dismissed.']