Johnston v Nationwide News Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2005] NSWCA 17
•11 February 2005
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Johnston v Nationwide News Pty Ltd [2005] NSWCA 17
[2005] NSWCA 17
11 February 2005
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Johnston (the applicant) sought leave to appeal against a decision of the District Court of New South Wales, which had referred a question of contempt to the Supreme Court of New South Wales. Nationwide News Pty Ltd was the respondent. The dispute concerned whether the District Court had the power to refer a contempt question to the Supreme Court under section 203 of the *District Court Act 1973* (NSW).
The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the District Court's referral of a contempt question to the Supreme Court constituted a "judgment or order in an action" within the meaning of section 127(1) of the *District Court Act 1973* (NSW). This determination was crucial for establishing the competency of an appeal to the Court of Appeal. A secondary issue, though not determinative of the outcome, related to the court's general reluctance to grant leave to appeal solely on the basis of costs orders.
The Court of Appeal held that the referral of a contempt question under section 203 of the *District Court Act 1973* (NSW) was not a "judgment or order in an action" as contemplated by section 127(1) of the Act. Consequently, the court found that an appeal against such a referral was not competent. The court also noted the general principle that leave to appeal is rarely granted in respect of costs orders alone.
The application for leave to appeal was dismissed.
The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the District Court's referral of a contempt question to the Supreme Court constituted a "judgment or order in an action" within the meaning of section 127(1) of the *District Court Act 1973* (NSW). This determination was crucial for establishing the competency of an appeal to the Court of Appeal. A secondary issue, though not determinative of the outcome, related to the court's general reluctance to grant leave to appeal solely on the basis of costs orders.
The Court of Appeal held that the referral of a contempt question under section 203 of the *District Court Act 1973* (NSW) was not a "judgment or order in an action" as contemplated by section 127(1) of the Act. Consequently, the court found that an appeal against such a referral was not competent. The court also noted the general principle that leave to appeal is rarely granted in respect of costs orders alone.
The application for leave to appeal was dismissed.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Procedure
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Jurisdiction
-
Costs
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Mandeville v Better Lending P/L [2016] SADC 146
Cases Citing This Decision
90
AZC20 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs
[2023] HCA 26
Mellifont v Attorney-General (Q)
[1991] HCA 53
Prothonotary of the Supreme Court of New South Wales v Dangerfield
[2016] NSWCA 277
Cases Cited
2
Statutory Material Cited
3
Commonwealth v Mullane
[1961] HCA 28
Mohareb v Palmer
[2017] NSWCA 281
Commonwealth v Mullane
[1961] HCA 28