Huang v Nazaran

Case [2021] NSWCA 243

Court of Appeal


Supreme Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Huang v Nazaran [2021] NSWCA 243
Hearing dates: 6 August 2021
Date of orders: 8 October 2021
Decision date: 08 October 2021
Before: Basten JA at [1];
Macfarlan JA at [2];
Meagher JA at [3]
Decision:

(1)   Set aside the orders made by the District Court on 15 March 2021, other than the dismissal of the respondent’s application for costs.

(2) Declare that the District Court has jurisdiction to determine the appeal pursuant to s 70(1)(b) of the Local Court Act 2007 (NSW).

(3)   Remit the matter to the District Court for the hearing and determination of the applicants’ appeal.

Catchwords:

JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS – supervisory jurisdiction – judicial review – application proceeding in Local Court special jurisdiction dismissed – where appeal to District Court under Local Court Act 2007 (NSW), s 70(1) dismissed for lack of jurisdiction – whether jurisdictional error in dismissing appeal

CIVIL PROCEDURE – jurisdiction – appeal to District Court under Local Court Act 2007 (NSW), s 70(1) from orders made in special jurisdiction – whether right of appeal from order dismissing proceeding

Legislation Cited:

Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW), Pt 3

Crimes (Appeal and Review) Amendment Act 2009 (NSW)

Crimes (Forensic Procedures) Act 2000 (NSW), ss 24, 115A

Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), Ch 4 Pt 2

Justices Act 1902 (NSW), Pts 4A, 5, 5A and 5B

Local Court Act 2007 (NSW), Pt 4

Local Courts Act 1982 (NSW), s 64

Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (NSW), ss 264, 268, 269, 273, 290, 292

Suitors’ Fund Act 1951 (NSW), s 6C

Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), s 69

Cases Cited:

Craig v South Australia (1995) 184 CLR 163; [1995] HCA 58

Folbigg v Attorney General of New South Wales [2021] NSWCA 44

Lewis v Sergeant Riley (2018) 96 NSWLR 274; [2017] NSWCA 272

Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs v Parata [2021] FCAFC 46

Sinkovich v Attorney General of New South Wales (2013) 85 NSWLR 783; [2013] NSWCA 383

Texts Cited:

New South Wales Government Attorney General’s Department, Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 – Report on the Statutory Review of the Act, (August 2008)

Explanatory Note to the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Amendment Bill 2009 (NSW)

Category:Principal judgment
Parties: Chenlong Huang (first applicant)
Xuejing Li (second applicant)
Fatemeh Nazaran (first respondent)
District Court of New South Wales (second respondent)
Representation:

Counsel:
G McGrath and K Tang (first and second applicant)
C Alis (Adam Jones Solicitors) (first respondent)

Solicitors:
Kammoun Sukari Lawyers (applicants)
Adam Jones Solicitors (first respondent)
File Number(s): 2021/170502
Publication restriction: N/A
 Decision under appeal 
Court or tribunal:
District Court of New South Wales
Jurisdiction:
Civil
Date of Decision:
15 March 2021
Before:
Conlon SC ADCJ
File Number(s):
2019/00378892

HEADNOTE

[This headnote is not to be read as part of the judgment]

The applicants commenced proceedings in the Local Court against the respondent seeking a noise abatement order under the

Continue reading Huang v Nazaran

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Huang v Nazaran [2021] NSWCA 243
Case
[2021] NSWCA 243
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Huang and Nazaran were the parties involved in proceedings before the District Court of New South Wales. The applicants, Huang, had an application dismissed in the Local Court's special jurisdiction. They then sought to appeal this dismissal to the District Court under section 70(1) of the *Local Court Act 2007* (NSW). However, the District Court dismissed this appeal, finding it lacked jurisdiction to hear an appeal from an order dismissing a proceeding. The applicants sought judicial review of the District Court's decision.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the District Court had jurisdiction under section 70(1) of the *Local Court Act 2007* (NSW) to hear an appeal from an order of the Local Court that dismissed a proceeding. Specifically, the court had to determine if an order dismissing a proceeding constituted an appealable "order" within the meaning of section 70(1)(b) of the Act.

The Court of Appeal held that the District Court had erred in law by concluding it lacked jurisdiction. The court reasoned that section 70(1)(b) of the *Local Court Act 2007* (NSW) grants a right of appeal to the District Court from any "order" made by the Local Court in its general or special jurisdiction. The dismissal of the applicants' application in the Local Court was an order made by the Local Court, and therefore fell within the scope of section 70(1)(b). The court found that the District Court's interpretation of "order" was too narrow and that the dismissal of a proceeding was a final order from which an appeal lay.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal set aside the District Court's orders dismissing the appeal, except for the dismissal of the respondent's application for costs. The court declared that the District Court did have jurisdiction to hear the appeal and remitted the matter to the District Court for determination.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) Set aside the orders made by the District Court on 15 March 2021, other than the dismissal of the respondent’s application for costs.

(2) Declare that the District Court has jurisdiction to determine the appeal pursuant to s 70(1)(b) of the Local Court Act 2007 (NSW).

(3) Remit the matter to the District Court for the hearing and determination of the applicants’ appeal.

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.