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: McCallum CJ
Before: Mossop J
Before: Price AJA
The applicant wanted the Court of Appeal to urgently hear a motion before a property auction scheduled for 23 August 2025. Although he said he learned of the auction on 18 July, he did not apply to expedite until 18 August. The Court considered that delay, the practical difficulty of arranging a hearing at short notice, fairness to other litigants and respondents, and the parties' respective interests in the property's sale. It refused expedition and ordered the applicant to pay the respondents' costs.
Before: G Burton SC, Senior MemberR C Titterton OAM, Senior Member
Before: Member Decision, Member Allan, Member Kusuma
Before: Catsanos SC DCJ
Before: Gray C
Before: Targett C
Before: Targett C
Before: Horton C
Before: Miller AC
Before: O’Neill C
Before: O’Neill C
Before: Elkaim AJ
Before: Schmidt AJ
Before: Bennett J
Before: McGrath J
Before: Black J
Before: Boddice JA
Goodwin sought more time to challenge his sentence, arguing that a total sentence of about four years, served concurrently, would have been appropriate. The Court considered the seriousness and distinct nature of the offending, his previous similar convictions and the timing of the new offences after parole. It also rejected his claims that the sentencing judge misunderstood his criminal history or the psychiatric report. Because the Court considered the proposed appeal ground had no prospect of success, it refused to extend time.
Before: Mr P, Schonell J
Before: Mr J