McGinn v Cranbrook School

The applicant, McGinn, appealed to the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales against a summary dismissal order made under rule 13.4 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW). The appeal was dismissed by a single judge of appeal as incompetent, and McGinn sought to re-open that decision. The appeal before the full bench concerned the nature of the hearing before the single judge and whether the order of summary dismissal was interlocutory, thus requiring leave to appeal under section 101(2)(e) of the *Supreme Court Act 1970* (NSW). McGinn also alleged that the respondents' submissions had misled the Court.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the single judge of appeal erred in dismissing McGinn's appeal as incompetent, and whether the re-opening application demonstrated relevant error. Central to these issues was the determination of whether the summary dismissal order was interlocutory or final, and consequently, whether leave to appeal was required. The Court also considered the applicability of rule 36.15(1) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) in relation to the re-opening application.

The Court of Appeal held that the summary dismissal order was interlocutory, meaning that leave to appeal was required under section 101(2)(e) of the *Supreme Court Act 1970* (NSW). As leave had not been granted, the appeal to the single judge was incompetent. The Court found no relevant error in the single judge's decision to dismiss the appeal on this basis. Furthermore, the Court found that the applicant had not demonstrated that the respondents' submissions had misled the Court.

Accordingly, the applicant's notice of motion filed on 17 June 2016 was dismissed, and the applicant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the motion.