Alcazar-Stevens v Stevens

The appeal concerned the interpretation of section 50(1) of the *Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014* (NSW) and the powers of an attorney. The primary dispute revolved around whether the respondent, as an attorney for a third party, had standing to apply for an extension of time to make a compensation claim under that section. The appeal was heard by Murrell CJ, Elkaim and Rangiah JJ.

The central legal issues before the appellate court were whether the primary judge had erred in granting an extension of time to the respondent, specifically by misconstruing section 50(1) of the *Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014* (NSW). This included determining whether the primary judge ought to have refused the extension on the basis that the respondent lacked reasonable prospects of establishing the necessary standing to make the application.

The Court of Appeal found that the primary judge had not erred in their interpretation of section 50(1). The reasoning focused on the scope of the attorney's authority and the conditions under which an extension of time could be granted. The Court concluded that the respondent did possess the requisite standing to bring the application.

Leave to appeal was granted, but the appeal itself was dismissed with costs.