Jaenke & Jaenke v Hinton

[1997] QCA 107

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL	[1997] QCA 107
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

Appeal No. 37 of 1995

Brisbane
[Jaenke v. Hinton]
BETWEEN:

KEVIN GEORGE JAENKE and SANDRA ELIZABETH JAENKE

(Defendants) Appellants

AND:

TONI HINTON

(Plaintiff) Respondent

___________________________________________________________________________

Pincus J.A. Thomas J. Williams J.

___________________________________________________________________________

Judgment delivered 3 November 1995

Further Order delivered 9 May 1997

Separate Reasons of Pincus J.A.; joint Reasons of Thomas and Williams JJ., all concurring as
to the order made.

___________________________________________________________________________

CERTIFICATE REFUSED

___________________________________________________________________________

Solicitors:	Phillips Fox for the appellants. Barwicks for the respondent. (at date of further order) McLaughlin Ivey Woodman for the respondent. (at date of judgment)
Hearing date:	11 September 1995.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

Appeal No. 37 of 1995

Brisbane

Before:  Pincus J.A. Thomas J. Williams J.

[Jaenke v. Hinton]
BETWEEN:

KEVIN GEORGE JAENKE and SANDRA ELIZABETH JAENKE

(Defendants) Appellants

AND:

TONI HINTON

(Plaintiff) Respondent

REASONS FOR FURTHER ORDER - PINCUS J.A.

Judgment delivered 3 November 1995 Further Order delivered 9 May 1997

I have read the reasons of the other members of the Court and respectfully agree with their Honours’ conclusion. I would however prefer to leave for another day the question of the effect of delay on an application for a certificate; I base my view on the circumstance that the appeal did not, in my opinion, succeed on a question of law but rather on factual considerations.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

Appeal No. 37 of 1995

Brisbane

Before:  Pincus J.A. Thomas J. Williams J.

[Jaenke v. Hinton]
BETWEEN:

KEVIN GEORGE JAENKE and SANDRA ELIZABETH JAENKE

(Defendants) Appellants

AND:

TONI HINTON

(Plaintiff) Respondent

REASONS FOR FURTHER ORDER - THOMAS J. AND WILLIAMS J.

Judgment delivered 3 November 1995 Further Order delivered 9 May 1997

We would refuse an indemnity certificate under the Appeal Costs Funds Act 1973 on the grounds that there has been an inordinate and unexplained delay in making an application in circumstances where the court would have been in a better position at the time judgment was handed down to determine whether or not the case presented to the Trial Judge was fairly arguable and whether or not the error was essentially one of law. Certificate refused.