Winslade Partners Pty Ltd v STERI-FLOW Filtration Systems (Aust) Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2011] SASCFC 140
•24 November 2011
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Winslade Partners Pty Ltd v Steri-Flow Filtration Systems (Aust) Pty Ltd [2011] SASCFC 140
[2011] SASCFC 140
24 November 2011
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Winslade Partners Pty Ltd sought leave to appeal to the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia against a decision of a single judge. The dispute concerned an application for leave to appeal in private, with the grounds of appeal being reasonably arguable and the amount involved being substantial.
The primary legal issue before the Full Court was whether to grant leave to appeal. This required the Court to consider whether the grounds of appeal were reasonably arguable and whether the substantial amount in dispute warranted appellate review.
The Full Court, comprising Doyle CJ, Anderson and Kelly JJ, granted leave to appeal. Their Honours found that the grounds of appeal were reasonably arguable, satisfying the threshold for granting leave. Furthermore, the substantial nature of the amount in dispute was a significant factor in their decision to permit the appeal to proceed.
The primary legal issue before the Full Court was whether to grant leave to appeal. This required the Court to consider whether the grounds of appeal were reasonably arguable and whether the substantial amount in dispute warranted appellate review.
The Full Court, comprising Doyle CJ, Anderson and Kelly JJ, granted leave to appeal. Their Honours found that the grounds of appeal were reasonably arguable, satisfying the threshold for granting leave. Furthermore, the substantial nature of the amount in dispute was a significant factor in their decision to permit the appeal to proceed.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Jurisdiction
-
Costs
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Winslade Partners Pty Ltd v Steri-Flow Filtration Systems (Aust) Pty Ltd [2011] SASCFC 140
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
1