Weinstock & Anor v Beck & Anor [2012] HCATrans 218

The High Court of Australia, constituted by Gummow and Hayne JJ, considered an application for special leave to appeal in the matter of *Weinstock & Anor v Beck & Anor*. The underlying dispute concerned a claim for damages for personal injury arising from a motor vehicle accident.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether the applicants had demonstrated an arguable case of error in the decision of the lower court, which had refused to grant leave to appeal against a judgment of the District Court of New South Wales. Specifically, the applicants sought to challenge the findings of fact and the application of the law by the District Court concerning the assessment of damages.

Gummow and Hayne JJ refused special leave to appeal. Their Honours noted that the applicants had failed to identify any error of law in the judgment of the Court of Appeal of New South Wales, which had upheld the District Court's decision. The High Court emphasised that special leave is a stringent test and requires the demonstration of a significant question of law or a substantial injustice, neither of which was established in this instance. The applicants' arguments were found to be essentially a re-argument of the facts and the application of established legal principles to those facts, which is not a sufficient basis for granting special leave.