Woodhouse v Thalis - [2017] NSWSC 1725

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Woodhouse v Thalis [2017] NSWSC 1725
Hearing dates: 7 September 2017
Date of orders: 15 December 2017
Decision date: 15 December 2017
Jurisdiction: Common Law
Before: Bellew J
Decision:
(1)    The application for an extension of time is refused.

(2)   The proceedings are dismissed.

(3)   The question of costs of the proceedings is reserved.
(4)   Absent reaching any agreement as to costs, the parties are to file written submissions with my Associate by Friday 2 February 2018, such submissions not to exceed two pages in length.
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appeal – Application for an extension of time in which to seek leave to appeal against a decision of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal – Necessity to consider the merits of the proposed appeal – Where Tribunal dismissed the proceedings brought by the plaintiff following a long series of procedural defaults and failures to comply with orders – No error on the part of the Tribunal – No miscarriage of discretion – Where appeal had no prospects of success – Application for an extension of time refused – Proceedings dismissed
Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW)
Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW)
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW)
Cases Cited: AHB v NSW Trustee and Guardian [2014] NSWCA 40
Bobolas v Waverley Council (2016) 92 NSWLR 406; [2016] NSWCA 139
Woodhouse v Thalis [2017] NSWCATAD 260
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Andrew Lance Woodhouse – Plaintiff
Philip Thalis – Defendant
Representation:
Counsel:
In person – Plaintiff
S Blanks (solicitor) – Defendant
Solicitors:
In person – Plaintiff
SBA Lawyers - Defendant

File Number(s): 2017/213057
Publication restriction: Nil
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal

Citation:

[2017] NSWCATAD 260

Date of Decision:

17 May 2017

Before:

M Craig QC; R Titterton; B Thomson

Judgment

By a summons filed on 22 June 2017, Andrew Lance Woodhouse (“the plaintiff”) seeks orders in respect of a decision of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) of 27 April 2017 dismissing proceedings brought by him against Philip Thalis (“the defendant”). The orders sought in the summons are pleaded in the following terms:

Leave to appeal from the (sic) all the decisions in the NCAT case.

Appeal be allowed.

Orders of the NCAT decision be set aside.

The matter be returned to the Tribunal for completion with recommendations in the plaintiff’s favour.

Fees, charges and costs if appropriate be allowed in favour of the plaintiff.

A time extension for lodgement of this appeal be allowed.

Transcripts NCAT hearings be provided

Costs assessments application lodged by the respondent be held in abeyance or refused

Leave be granted to lodge an Amended summons

A total of 15 grounds of appeal are pleaded in the following terms:

1 Failure to recognise and apply natural justice.
The Tribunal refused an application for a transcript of proceedings so I was
disadvantaged regarding decisions made during the course of proceedings.
My applications for adjournment on the…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Woodhouse v Thalis

Details

AGLC: Woodhouse v Thalis [2017] NSWSC 1725
Case: [2017] NSWSC 1725
Decision Date: 15 December 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The plaintiff sought an extension of time to appeal against a decision of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT), which had dismissed his proceedings. The Tribunal's decision followed a series of procedural defaults and failures to comply with orders by the plaintiff. The plaintiff's appeal was considered by the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the plaintiff's application for an extension of time to appeal should be granted. In assessing this, the court had to determine whether the plaintiff's proposed appeal had any prospects of success. The court considered whether there was any error on the part of the Tribunal and if there was a miscarriage of discretion in dismissing the proceedings. The court also had to weigh the merits of the proposed appeal.

The court found that the Tribunal's decision was correct and that there was no error on its part. It also determined that the plaintiff's appeal had no prospects of success. The court concluded that the plaintiff had not demonstrated any compelling reason for an extension of time, and therefore, the application was refused. As a result, the proceedings were dismissed.

The court did not make any specific orders beyond dismissing the plaintiff's application for an extension of time and the proceedings. The decision affirmed the Tribunal's dismissal of the plaintiff's proceedings and highlighted the importance of procedural compliance in administrative tribunals.

Orders