Aurora Construction Materials Pty Ltd & Anor v De Luca

Link copied
Case Copied 1 min read

AURORA CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS PTY LTD & ANOR

v

DE LUCA

[2018] HCASL 337
M112/2018

  1. This application for special leave to appeal from the decision of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria (Maxwell P and Kaye JA, Tate JA agreeing) requires an extension of time.  An extension of time would be futile because an appeal to this Court would not enjoy sufficient prospects of success to warrant a grant of special leave to appeal.  The application should be dismissed.

  2. Pursuant to r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application with costs.

M.M. Gordon
7 November 2018
J.J. Edelman
CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Aurora Construction Materials Pty Ltd & Anor v De Luca and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2018] HCASL 337
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Aurora Construction Materials Pty Ltd and another sought special leave to appeal from the Supreme Court of Victoria's decision, which was upheld by the Court of Appeal. The original dispute involved a claim for damages related to construction materials. The Court of Appeal had previously dismissed the application for an extension of time to appeal, and the applicants sought special leave to appeal from this decision.

The central legal issue was whether the application for special leave to appeal should be granted, particularly in relation to the extension of time. The applicants argued that an extension of time would not be futile, while the respondents contended that it would be, as the appeal lacked sufficient prospects of success.

The Court held that an extension of time would indeed be futile, as the appeal did not have sufficient prospects of success. The reasoning focused on the merits of the appeal and the likelihood of the High Court finding in favour of the applicants. Consequently, the application for special leave to appeal was dismissed. The Court further directed the Registrar to prepare an order dismissing the application with costs.

No additional orders were made beyond dismissing the application for special leave to appeal and awarding costs. This decision underscores the stringent criteria for granting special leave to appeal in the High Court of Australia, particularly when it involves issues of procedural timeliness and the likelihood of success on appeal.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.