Case law library
Australian case law library
Search court decisions by neutral citation, case name, jurisdiction, court, judges, catchwords, and judgment summary.
Case law entry points
Start with judgments that other decisions keep coming back to, then follow the citations through the case graph.
NCAT Appeal Panel | 2014-04-09
Tenants were terminated for non-payment of rent following an uncontested hearing where the landlord's agent gave evidence and the Member recorded findings in hearing notes. The tenants sought leave to internally appeal under s 80(2)(b) but did not raise any question of law; therefore leave required. Clause 12 Schedule 4 requires showing the appellant 'may have suffered a substantial miscarriage of justice' because the decision was unfair, against the weight of evidence, or there is significant new evidence. The tenants relied on phone logs and asserted contact and willingness to pay. The Appeal Panel found the record disclosed arrears and necessary findings, the phone logs were not fresh or persuasive, and there was no denial of procedural fairness. Leave was refused, the appeal dismissed, and the stay of the original orders lifted.
1,627 case citations
Before: Schonell J
Before: Croft J
Before: Keogh J
Before: Craig J
Before: Daly AsJ
Before: Matthews J
Before: Burgess JR
Before: Watson J
Before: Wilson J
Before: Johnstone J, Brown J, North J
Before: Prof P, Dr J, Marks J
Before: Dr J
Before: Galwey AC
Before: Dickson C
Before: Dixon SC
Before: Member Coleman
Before: D. Goldstein. Senior Member
Before: P Durack SC, Senior MemberDr K M George, Senior Member
Before: S Westgarth, Deputy PresidentD Goldstein, Senior Member
Before: A Bell SC, Senior MemberJ Redfern PSM, Senior Member
Before: Leeming JA and Price AJA
The applicants chose not to continue defending the trial after the judge refused an adjournment. They later tried to reopen the judgment and rely on claims and defence allegations that had already been removed from their case by earlier orders. The Court of Appeal held that the applicants had not challenged the finding that they had no satisfactory explanation for leaving the trial, and that this strongly counted against reopening the judgment. It also held that the earlier orders remained in force, so the merits review could not be expanded to cover the removed parts of the case. Leave to appeal was refused, with costs.
Before: Payne JA, McHugh JA, Free JA
The Court decided that the costs should be fixed as lump sums rather than sent through a detailed assessment. It considered further assessment likely to be expensive and protracted, and the costs records sufficiently informative to fix fair amounts. It ordered Mr Rahman to pay $60,000 to Ms Rahman and $50,000 to the two trustees for the leave application, plus separate amounts for the costs motions. However, the trustees could not include charges for their own personal work merely because they billed that work through incorporated law practices.
Before: Mitchelmore JA at [1]Kirk JA at [30]Price AJA at [31]
Atanaskovic sought leave to challenge a stay that prevented enforcement of judgments for unpaid legal fees while costs issues between the parties remained unresolved. The Court of Appeal read the primary judge's reasons in context and concluded that, despite references to costs orders, he understood the applicant was trying to enforce the principal judgments and meant to stay them. It found no reviewable error in the description of the enforcement conduct or in the lack of an express discussion of stay principles. The Court also said that ongoing interest and the substantial court resources already used weighed against leave. The application was dismissed with costs.
Before: Kennett J
Before: McWilliam J
Before: Kelly AJ