Tanious v NSW Land and Housing Corporation

The applicant, Mr Tanious, sought leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales against a decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (per Davies J) which had refused him leave to appeal from a decision of the Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT). The dispute concerned an application made by Mr Tanious to NCAT.

The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the Supreme Court had erred in refusing leave to appeal from NCAT. This required the Court of Appeal to consider the principles governing the grant of leave to appeal from decisions of the Supreme Court refusing leave to appeal from NCAT, particularly in circumstances where the applicant sought to raise new grounds of appeal that were not considered by the primary judge.

Leeming and Payne JJA held that the Supreme Court had not erred in refusing leave to appeal. Their Honours noted that the applicant had not demonstrated any error on the part of the Supreme Court in its assessment of the grounds of appeal that were before it. Furthermore, the Court of Appeal declined to consider the new grounds of appeal sought to be raised by the applicant, as these had not been considered by the Supreme Court and the applicant had not established any compelling reason for their introduction at this late stage. The Court applied the principles that leave to appeal from a refusal of leave to appeal is exceptional and requires demonstration of error by the primary judge.

The summons seeking leave to appeal was accordingly dismissed.