Johnston v Boyd

The applicant, Johnston, sought leave to appeal from a decision of the primary judge who had refused to grant judicial review of a costs assessment. The dispute concerned the applicant's contention that they had been denied procedural fairness due to the refusal of a further adjournment during the costs assessment process. The appeal was heard by Adamson JA and Basten AJA in the Court of Appeal.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the primary judge had erred in refusing the application for judicial review, and whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to file their summons seeking leave to appeal, given that it was filed months out of time. The court was also required to consider whether there was an arguable error on the part of the primary judge or an issue of principle justifying the grant of leave to appeal.

The Court of Appeal reasoned that the applicant had failed to follow the prescribed procedure for review and appeal, and that the allegation of procedural unfairness was not established. The court found no arguable error on the part of the primary judge and no issue of principle that warranted granting leave to appeal. Consequently, the court refused the applicant an extension of time to file the summons seeking leave to appeal and dismissed the summons. The applicant was ordered to pay the first respondent's costs, to be determined on the papers.