Krown Living Pty Ltd v Lando
Case
•
[2016] ACAT 149
•19 December 2016
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Krown Living Pty Ltd v Lando [2016] ACAT 149
[2016] ACAT 149
19 December 2016
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Krown Living Pty Ltd, an appellant, sought leave to appeal out of time against a decision made by Lando, the respondent, which was a Tribunal. The appeal pertained to a dispute regarding the enforcement of a security interest in relation to a property transaction. The legal issues the court was required to decide included whether the Tribunal had the authority to grant leave to appeal out of time, and if the appellant had demonstrated any arguable grounds of appeal or a miscarriage of justice.
The court considered the principles governing applications for leave to appeal out of time, emphasising the importance of finality, respect for time limits, and the potential prejudice to the other party. The court noted that the appellant had not produced any material to support the original application and had failed to identify any arguable questions of fact or law. Additionally, no arguable grounds of appeal were identified, and the appellant did not demonstrate a miscarriage of justice. The court concluded that the appellant had not met the necessary criteria for leave to appeal out of time, and the application was refused.
The Tribunal ordered that the application for leave to appeal out of time was dismissed. This decision highlights the importance of adhering to time limits in legal proceedings and the stringent requirements for obtaining leave to appeal out of time.
The court considered the principles governing applications for leave to appeal out of time, emphasising the importance of finality, respect for time limits, and the potential prejudice to the other party. The court noted that the appellant had not produced any material to support the original application and had failed to identify any arguable questions of fact or law. Additionally, no arguable grounds of appeal were identified, and the appellant did not demonstrate a miscarriage of justice. The court concluded that the appellant had not met the necessary criteria for leave to appeal out of time, and the application was refused.
The Tribunal ordered that the application for leave to appeal out of time was dismissed. This decision highlights the importance of adhering to time limits in legal proceedings and the stringent requirements for obtaining leave to appeal out of time.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Litigation & Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Limitation Periods
-
Jurisdiction
-
Res Judicata
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Kaufhold v Huang and Anor (Appeal) [2021] ACAT 62
Cases Citing This Decision
10
Kaufhold v Huang & Anor (Appeal)
[2021] ACAT 62
Reynolds v Powley and Anor (Appeal)
[2020] ACAT 7
Reynolds v Chessell & Anor (Appeal)
[2019] ACAT 119
Cases Cited
9
Statutory Material Cited
2
Legal Practitioner v Law Society of the ACT
[2016] ACTSC 203
Hussain v Farhmand
[2016] ACTSC 122
Wang v Lin & Jiang
[2016] ACAT 84