Wyness v Roennfeldt

This matter concerned an appeal from a decision of Justice Parker of the Supreme Court of South Australia. The appeal was brought by the applicants, who sought leave to appeal against orders made in relation to a dispute concerning fencing between neighbouring properties.

The applicants raised two grounds of appeal. Firstly, they contended that Justice Parker erred in finding that there was no substance to concerns about the expertise of fencing contractors and that the cost of proposed rectification works would be substantially less than a full replacement. This ground was based on evidence that, since the original judgment, the contractor ordered to perform the works had declined to do so, and no other contractor was prepared to undertake the work for less than the original quoted price for a complete replacement. Secondly, the applicants argued that Justice Parker erred in preferring the scope of works proposed by the respondent's expert, which differed from the works originally ordered, in circumstances where this expert had subsequently proposed a modified scope.

The Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia, comprising Acting Livesey CJ and Bleby J, considered the evidence presented by the applicants, including an affidavit from their solicitor detailing new information regarding contractor quotes and the viability of rectification works. The Court noted that some of the information regarding the initial quotation by Complete Underpinning was available to the applicants prior to the original trial. The Court also observed that the respondent had undertaken to seek directions from the appeal judge regarding the scope of works, and that any necessary administrative arrangements for the hearing of such matters, even with the retirement of Justice Parker, could be addressed.

Ultimately, the Full Court refused the applicants' application for leave to appeal.