Mohan v McMillan

Mohan engaged McMillan to renovate two bathrooms at Mohan's property. Disputes arose regarding the payments for the work completed. Mohan sought progress payments, claiming McMillan failed to make them, while McMillan argued the work was not satisfactory and refused to pay. The matter proceeded to the Civil and Administrative Tribunal (CAT) of New South Wales, where the tribunal found in favour of McMillan, ruling that Mohan was not entitled to the progress payments sought. Mohan appealed to the Supreme Court, seeking leave to appeal against the CAT's decision.

The key legal issues were whether the grounds for leave to appeal existed, considering the minor nature of the dispute, and whether the respondent could adduce new evidence during the appeal. The appeal raised questions about the CAT's decision on the merits and the scope of the appellate tribunal's power to admit new evidence.

The Court considered the minor nature of the dispute, which typically warranted a refusal of leave to appeal. It examined the CAT's reasoning and whether there were any apparent errors warranting appellate intervention. The Court also assessed the respondent's attempt to introduce new evidence during the appeal, reviewing the CAT's authority to admit such evidence and the impact on the fairness and integrity of the appeal process. Ultimately, the Court concluded that no grounds for leave to appeal existed, and the CAT's decision was sound. The Court ruled that fresh evidence should not be admitted on appeal, affirming the CAT's judgment.