Kevin David Neylon v Raymond William Carle

[2000] QCA 350

[2000] QCA 350

COURT OF APPEAL

McPHERSON JA
THOMAS JA
MOYNIHAN J

Appeal No 3442 of 2000

KEVIN DAVID NEYLON               Respondent   (Plaintiff)   

and

RAYMOND WILLIAM CARLE            Appellant    (Defendant)

BRISBANE

..DATE 24/08/2000

JUDGMENT

McPHERSON JA:  I will say only this, the Court has debated with Mr Eleftheriou on behalf of the applicant and Mr Neylon in person some of the issues and problems that we see arising in this rather ill-fated litigation.  Our attempts to find some way out of the matter other than litigation have, at any rate so far, not been successful.  In the circumstances, and looking at the matter simply as one of fact and law, I see nothing in the application before us for leave to appeal against the decision of his Honour Judge Samios that would induce me to grant such leave and permit the appeal to proceed.

In those circumstances, it is my view that the application for leave to appeal against the decision of Judge Samios that is made by Mr Carle in this matter should be dismissed; that the application that is made by Mr Neylon for leave to appeal against that decision in relation to the question of costs should also be dismissed; and that, in the case of both those dismissals, there should be no order as to costs.

THOMAS JA:  I agree.  The order in the District Court was interlocutory and it resulted in an order which will permit the dispute to be ventilated in due course on the merits if the parties are eventually minded to do so.  In these circumstances I do not think it desirable to grant leave to appeal against the decision that has been made.  I agree with the orders proposed.

MOYNIHAN J:  I agree with the orders proposed and what has been said.  I cannot resist adding as I said in the course of argument that if the matter is to litigated to judgment in the Magistrates Court there is a lot of work to be done on the pleadings before anything else.

McPHERSON JA:  The orders of the Court are that the applications are dismissed.  There will be no order as to costs.

-----