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.
1,764 case citations
Before: Targett C
Before: Washington C
Before: Washington C
Before: Peatman AC
Before: Walsh C
Before: Chin J
Before: Gray C
Before: Mr Michael J
Before: Commissioner For
Before: Leeming JA, Mitchelmore JA, Free JA
The Court rejected MWP's attempt to reopen the earlier judgment and found that its objections about service did not prevent the Court from deciding Mr Emmott's costs applications. It ordered MWP to pay indemnity costs, set as gross sums, but reduced the amounts substantially because the costs of obtaining security had exceeded the security itself. It declined to make Mr Wilson personally pay those costs, but referred the judgment and papers to the Legal Services Commissioner because of concerns about his conduct. The judgment does not decide whether the Commissioner will take further action.
Before: Mitchelmore JA, Price AJA
The Court of Appeal refused permission to appeal the dismissal of Ergashova's defamation case for delay. It accepted that the primary judge had made some mistakes in describing related proceedings, but decided those mistakes did not affect the key reasoning. The evidence available to the primary judge did not establish that Ergashova's health prevented her from giving instructions or adequately explain the repeated delays and failures to meet court requirements. The Court therefore found no sufficiently clear injustice or material error to justify leave, and ordered costs.
Before: Leeming JA at [1]Free JA at [2]
The Court of Appeal allowed the applicants more time to file their leave application, but refused permission to appeal. It considered that their Supreme Court claim was an attempt to revisit workers compensation matters assigned to the WCC and PIC, rather than a properly framed appeal or judicial review challenge. The applicants’ other arguments did not show a sufficiently clear injustice or raise an important legal question. They were ordered to pay the respondents’ costs.
Before: G Sarginson, Deputy PresidentJ Gatland, Senior Member
Before: Member Decision
Before: Campton J
Before: Austin J