(1) The motion filed 20 December 2024 be dismissed.
(2) The applicants pay the respondents’ costs of the motion filed 20 December 2024 in the gross sum of $13,000 (including GST).
(3) Lift the stay made on 3 February 2025.
Catchwords:
CIVIL PROCEDURE — Court of Appeal — review of decision of single judge of appeal — Supreme Court Act 1970, s 46(4) — Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, r 51.58 —whether applicants demonstrated error of principle or that the decision was plainly wrong
[This headnote is not to be read as part of the judgment]
This is the latest chapter in an ongoing litigious…
Grounds of appeal
[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.
[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.
[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.
Consideration
[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.
[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.
Continue reading Lambourne v Baker (No 6)
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
Lambourne v Baker (No 6) [2025] NSWCA 45
Case
[2025] NSWCA 45
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The applicants sought leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales against a decision of a single judge of the Court of Appeal. The underlying dispute concerned a previous judgment of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The applicants contended that the single judge had erred in law in their previous decision.
The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the applicants had demonstrated that the single judge's decision was affected by an error of principle or was plainly wrong, as required by section 46(4) of the *Supreme Court Act 1970* (NSW) and rule 51.58 of the *Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005* (NSW) for leave to appeal to the full court.
The Court of Appeal considered the arguments presented by both parties. It found that the applicants had failed to establish the necessary grounds for leave to appeal. Consequently, the Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal. The Court also ordered that the stay previously imposed on the judgment be lifted.
Orders
Orders of the court
(1) The motion filed 20 December 2024 be dismissed.
(2) The applicants pay the respondents’ costs of the motion filed 20 December 2024 in the gross sum of $13,000 (including GST).