YOUNG v JACOBSEN [1996] NSWCA 574

YOUNG v JACOBSEN [1996] NSWCA 574

Applications for leave to appeal were refused because the questions sought to be removed were too broad and premature given no findings of fact or law had been made by the primary judge, and the matter was not ready for appellate consideration.

Parties
Applicant: Young; Respondent: Jacobsen
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 April 1996
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Dismissed
Outcome
applications dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Removal of Proceedings, Leave to Appeal, Supreme Court Rules Part 12 Rule 2, Cross Vesting Act S 5(2)
Civil Procedure Removal of Proceedings Leave to Appeal Supreme Court Rules Part 12 Rule 2 Cross Vesting Act S 5(2)

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Young

Applicant

Jacobsen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted from a decision declining removal of proceedings to the Court of Appeal under Supreme Court Rules, Part 12, Rule 2
  2. 2 Whether proceedings should be transferred under s 5(2) of the Cross-Vesting Act

Ratio Decidendi

Applications for leave to appeal were refused because the questions sought to be removed were too broad and premature given no findings of fact or law had been made by the primary judge, and the matter was not ready for appellate consideration.

Court Disposition

applications dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The applications are dismissed with costs.