[2003] QCA 63
COURT OF APPEAL
McMURDO P
No 9018 of 2002
| JOHN EDMOND WALKER | Appellant/Plaintiff |
| and | |
| PRIMAC ELDERS LIMITED | Respondent/Defendant |
| BRISBANE ..DATE 21/02/2003 | |
| ORDER 21022003 T03/BC5 M/T COA23/2003 |
1
THE PRESIDENT: This matter is now becoming an old appeal. It
was filed on 30 September last year. It is listed for hearing
on 13 March. Again, the appellant has been slow in
progressing the appeal. The undertaking about the record book
| was filed late. The appellant's outline was filed late and | 10 |
| only after several extensions were granted. The settled index was due on 9 December 2002 but has not been received despite being contacted by a Registry staff member. So, both the settled index and of course the record are therefore overdue. | |
| 20 | |
| ... | |
| THE PRESIDENT: The orders are the settled index is to be | |
| filed and served within four days of today's date. The record | |
| book is to be filed and served within eight days of receipt of | 30 |
| the settled index. In the event of noncompliance with these orders, the matter is to be listed before me at a date to be fixed by the Registrar to show cause why the appeal should not be struck out for want of prosecution. | |
| 40 | |
| The necessity for this mention has been the dilatoriness of the appellant. The appellant should pay the respondent's costs of and incidental to this mention, to be assessed. They are the orders, thank you. | |
| 50 |
-----
2 ORDER 60
Details
- AGLC
- Walker v Primac Elders Ltd [2003] QCA 63
- Case
- [2003] QCA 63
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
John Edmond Walker appeals against a decision of the primary judge in the District Court of Queensland, which dismissed his claim against Primac Elders Limited for breach of contract and misrepresentation. The appeal was filed on 30 September 2002 and is listed for hearing on 13 March 2003. The appellant has been slow in progressing the appeal, with late filing of the record book and settled index, despite several extensions being granted. The President of the Court has ordered that the settled index be filed and served within four days and the record book within eight days of receipt of the settled index, or the matter risks being struck out for want of prosecution. The appellant must also pay the respondent's costs of and incidental to this mention.
The legal issues the court had to decide included whether the primary judge erred in finding that the appellant had failed to establish a cause of action against the respondent for breach of contract and misrepresentation. The court had to examine the evidence and determine whether the respondent had breached the contract and made misrepresentations to the appellant. Additionally, the court had to assess whether the primary judge's findings were supported by the evidence and whether there were any errors in law or procedure that affected the outcome of the case.
In delivering the judgment of the Court, the President of the Court noted that the appellant had been slow in progressing the appeal and had failed to comply with the Court's orders. The President found that the appellant's delay in filing the settled index and record book was unreasonable and had caused inconvenience to the Court and the respondent. The President ordered that the settled index be filed and served within four days and the record book within eight days of receipt of the settled index, or the matter risks being struck out for want of prosecution. The President also ordered that the appellant pay the respondent's costs of and incidental to this mention, which are to be assessed.
The Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the decision of the primary judge. The Court found that the appellant had failed to establish a cause of action against the respondent for breach of contract and misrepresentation. The Court held that the primary judge's findings were supported by the evidence and that there were no errors in law or procedure that affected the outcome of the case. The Court further found that the appellant's delay in progressing the appeal was unreasonable and had caused inconvenience to the Court and the respondent. The Court ordered that the appellant pay the respondent's costs of and incidental to this mention, which are to be assessed.
The legal issues the court had to decide included whether the primary judge erred in finding that the appellant had failed to establish a cause of action against the respondent for breach of contract and misrepresentation. The court had to examine the evidence and determine whether the respondent had breached the contract and made misrepresentations to the appellant. Additionally, the court had to assess whether the primary judge's findings were supported by the evidence and whether there were any errors in law or procedure that affected the outcome of the case.
In delivering the judgment of the Court, the President of the Court noted that the appellant had been slow in progressing the appeal and had failed to comply with the Court's orders. The President found that the appellant's delay in filing the settled index and record book was unreasonable and had caused inconvenience to the Court and the respondent. The President ordered that the settled index be filed and served within four days and the record book within eight days of receipt of the settled index, or the matter risks being struck out for want of prosecution. The President also ordered that the appellant pay the respondent's costs of and incidental to this mention, which are to be assessed.
The Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the decision of the primary judge. The Court found that the appellant had failed to establish a cause of action against the respondent for breach of contract and misrepresentation. The Court held that the primary judge's findings were supported by the evidence and that there were no errors in law or procedure that affected the outcome of the case. The Court further found that the appellant's delay in progressing the appeal was unreasonable and had caused inconvenience to the Court and the respondent. The Court ordered that the appellant pay the respondent's costs of and incidental to this mention, which are to be assessed.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.