Dibb & Anor v Transport For NSW

DIBB & ANOR
v
TRANSPORT FOR NSW
[2024] HCASL 275
S111/2024

The applicants require an extension of time within which to seek special leave to appeal from a decision of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Payne, Kirk and Stern JJA) dismissing an appeal from the judgment of the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales (Pain J) in relation to an application seeking compensation for the compulsory acquisition of property.
The Court of Appeal applied settled principles with respect to the issue sought to be appealed to this Court, and there is no reason to doubt the correctness of its application of those principles. No question of principle falls for determination in this application. It would therefore be futile to grant the extension of time that is sought.
Special leave to appeal is refused.
Gordon J
Steward J
7 November 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of New South Wales, the matter of Dibb & Anor v Transport for New South Wales was heard. The applicants sought an extension of time to appeal a decision made by the Court of Appeal, which had dismissed their appeal against a judgment from the Land and Environment Court concerning compensation for the compulsory acquisition of their property. The applicants, represented by Dibb and another party, were dissatisfied with the outcome and aimed to challenge the Court of Appeal's decision before the High Court.

The central legal issue before the court was whether to grant the applicants an extension of time to lodge an appeal seeking special leave to appeal the Court of Appeal's decision. The applicants argued that they needed more time to prepare and file their appeal. The court needed to determine whether the principles applied by the Court of Appeal were correct and if there was any basis to question the application of those principles. The applicants also sought to challenge the correctness of the Court of Appeal's decision on the merits.

The court found that the Court of Appeal had correctly applied the relevant principles in dismissing the appeal. There was no indication that the Court of Appeal had erred in its application of the law. The High Court held that no question of principle was at stake in the appeal, and thus, granting an extension of time would be futile. Consequently, the court refused the application for special leave to appeal, affirming the decisions of both the Court of Appeal and the Land and Environment Court.

As a result of the court's decision, the applicants were not granted special leave to appeal the Court of Appeal's decision. The refusal of special leave to appeal meant that the earlier judgments dismissing the applicants' appeal remained in place. The applicants were thus not permitted to further challenge the acquisition compensation decision in the High Court.

Keep reading for free

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established