Cachia v Grech

[2009] NSWCA 232

New South Wales

Court of Appeal

CITATION:	Cachia v Grech [2009] NSWCA 232
HEARING DATE(S):	On the papers
JUDGMENT DATE:	30 July 2009
JUDGMENT OF:	Hodgson JA; Ipp JA
DECISION:	Application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs.
CATCHWORDS:	PROCEDURE – Application for leave to appeal – Need to show reasonably arguable case of error, and that there is a reasonable prospect of substantive relief being obtained.
LEGISLATION CITED:	Legal Profession Act 2004 ss 317, 319, 327
CATEGORY:	Procedural and other rulings
PARTIES:	Laurence CACHIA (claimant) Henry GRECH trading as Grech Partners Solicitors (opponent)
FILE NUMBER(S):	CA 40071/09
COUNSEL:	A T S DAWSON (opponent)
SOLICITORS:	Laurence CACHIA self-represented (claimant) Colin Biggers & Paisley (opponent)
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION:	District Court
LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S):	DC 04319/08
LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER:	Murrell SC DCJ
LOWER COURT DATE OF DECISION:	9 December 2008
LOWER COURT MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	Cahcia v Grech [2008] NSWDC 288

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COURT OF APPEAL

CA 40071/09
DC 04319/08

HODGSON JA
IPP JA

30 JULY 2009

Laurence CACHIA v Henry GRECH trading as Grech Partners Solicitors

Judgment

1 THE COURT: On 9 December 2008, Murrell SC DCJ determined proceedings brought by the applicant (Mr Cachia) against the respondent (Mr Grech) challenging a decision of the Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal (CTTT), by affirming that decision.

2 Mr Cachia seeks leave to appeal from the primary judge’s decision. The parties agreed that the leave application be determined on the papers.

Circumstances

3 In about 2004 Mr Cachia, through real estate agents Dwyer and Eden Realty Pty Limited, leased to a tenant property owned by him. The tenant damaged the property.

4 Mr Cachia instructed Mr Grech to take proceedings in the Local Court against the agent, on the basis that the agent had acted wrongly in various ways in connection with leasing the property to the particular tenant. Mr Grech subsequently, by an email dated 15 April 2005, terminated the retainer, referring to Mr Cachia not wishing to retain a barrister despite their advice.

5 Mr Cachia represented himself in the Local Court proceedings, and lost. Mr Cachia appealed to the Supreme Court, and that appeal was dismissed.

6 Mr Cachia then brought proceedings in the CTTT against Mr Grech, claiming damages on the basis that his work was unsatisfactory and that he had wrongly terminated the retainer. The CTTT dismissed this claim with costs.

7 Mr Cachia appealed to the District Court, and it was in disposing of this appeal that the primary judge made the decision which Mr Cachia seeks to challenge.

Issues

8 The draft notice of appeal contains ninety-seven grounds, some of them containing several sub-grounds. It would not be appropriate in an application such as this to review all these grounds individually. What we will do is to isolate issues that in our opinion could conceivably have some substance.

9 One is the claim that in various ways Mr Cachia was denied procedural fairness by the CTTT, and…