Wnuczynski v Maicon Electrical Pty Ltd

Wnuczynski sought leave to appeal against a decision of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal) which dismissed his claim for the payment of $1,174.80. The claim was for work done on premises leased by the appellant to the respondent, Maicon Electrical Pty Ltd. The respondent had been engaged by a managing agent to carry out the work, without the lessor's authorisation. The Tribunal found that the managing agent had the authority to instruct the work to be done and dismissed the appellant's claim. The appellant sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court on the basis that the Tribunal erred in its finding that the managing agent had the authority to instruct the work. The appellant argued that the Tribunal had failed to take into account the lessor's lack of authority in its decision-making process.

The court considered whether there was a serious question to be tried in relation to the appellant's argument that the Tribunal erred in finding that the managing agent had the authority to instruct the work. The court noted that the appellant had not provided any evidence to support his argument that the managing agent did not have the authority to instruct the work. The court also noted that the Tribunal had considered the relevant evidence and had found that the managing agent had the authority to instruct the work. The court found that the appellant had not demonstrated that the Tribunal's decision was erroneous or that there was a serious question to be tried. The court therefore dismissed the appellant's application for leave to appeal.