Court of Appeal
Supreme Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Gani v Maiolo [2013] NSWCA 107 Hearing dates: 2 May 2013 Decision date: 02 May 2013 Before: Basten JA at [1];
Meagher JA at [2]Decision: 1. Dismiss the application for leave to appeal from the judgment of Hall J of 27 November 2012.
2. Order the applicant to pay the respondents' costs of the proceedings in this Court.
[Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.]
Catchwords: APPEAL - application for leave to appeal from decision in Common Law Division dismissing an appeal from decision of Appeal Panel of Administrative Decisions Tribunal - underlying dispute as to commencement date of lease and for payment of first rental instalment - primary judge held no error of law on part of Appeal Panel in upholding Tribunal's decision - no arguable error by primary judge on any question of law - application for leave to appeal dismissed Legislation Cited: Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997, ss 113, 119
Retail Leases Act 1994, s 17
Supreme Court Act 1970, ss 48, 51, 101Cases Cited: Gani v Maiolo (RLD) [2012] NSWADTAP 10
Gani v Maiolo [2011] NSWADT 219
Gani v Maiolo [2012] NSWSC 1417Category: Principal judgment Parties: Mohammed Nurul Gani (Applicant)
Raffaele Maiolo (First Respondent)
Maria Maiolo (Second Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
In person (Applicant)
M Tibbey (First and Second Respondents)
File Number(s): 2012/380651 Decision under appeal
- Citation:
- Gani v Maiolo [2012] NSWSC 1417
- Date of Decision:
- 2012-11-27 00:00:00
- Before:
- Hall J
- File Number(s):
- 2012/214069
Judgment
BASTEN JA: On 2 May 2013 the Court dismissed the application for leave to appeal in this matter and ordered the applicant to pay the respondents' costs of the application. The Court reserved its reasons. I join in the reasons of Meagher JA for making those orders.
MEAGHER JA: The applicant seeks leave to appeal from a judgment of Hall J: Gani v Maiolo [2012] NSWSC 1417. That judgment dismissed the applicant's appeal from a decision of the Appeal Panel of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal of New South Wales: Gani v Maiolo (RLD) [2012] NSWADTAP 10. That appeal was brought under s 119(1) of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 and was limited to questions of law. By reason of s 48 of the Supreme Court Act 1970, that appeal should have been heard by the Court of Appeal. Nevertheless, it was commenced, continued and disposed of in the Common Law Division of the Court as permitted by s 51(1)(d) of the Act.
Leave is required to appeal from a final judgment or order of the Court in a Division which does not…
Continue reading Gani v Maiolo
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Gani v Maiolo [2013] NSWCA 107
- Case
- [2013] NSWCA 107
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether Hall J had erred in law by upholding the Appeal Panel's decision, which in turn had upheld the Tribunal's decision. Specifically, the court considered whether there was any arguable error of law in Hall J's determination that the Appeal Panel had not erred.
Basten and Meagher JJA found no arguable error of law on the part of the primary judge. Their Honours concluded that Hall J had correctly determined that the Appeal Panel had not made any error of law in its decision regarding the lease commencement date and rental payment. Consequently, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed.
The Court of Appeal ordered that the application for leave to appeal be dismissed and that the applicant pay the respondents' costs of the proceedings in the Court of Appeal.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. Dismiss the application for leave to appeal from the judgment of Hall J of 27 November 2012.
2. Order the applicant to pay the respondents' costs of the proceedings in this Court.
[Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.]
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.