High Court of Australia
OF AUSTRALIA.
APPELLANT ;
ReEsPONDENT.
ON APPEAL FROM 'THE SUPREME COURT OF » tans SOUTH AUSTRALIA.
Court—Appeal from Supreme Court of State—Appealable amount— 4.0. oy A. © Fudgnent for: landlord for recovery of possession of property—Property worth yg47_ over £300—Tenant's interest worth under £300—Whether appeal as of right to ue Court—Judiciary Act 1903-1946 (No. 6 of 1903—No. 10 of 1946), 8.35 ADELAtE, i) (@) (2). ay
obtained against his tenant judgment for recovery of possession premises occupied by the latter. The value of the property exceeded Oct. 23.
Latham C.J., Starke and Dixon JJ.
ld, that in applying s. 35 (1) (a) (2) of the Judiciary Act, 1903-1946 the » of the possession under the tenaney was the relevant matter and that nt therefore could not appeal as of right to the High Court, tual Trustee Co. Ltd., (1918) 25 C.L.R. 1, followed ; Tipper v. (1911) 13C.L.R, 248, explained ; Milne v. James, (1910) 13 C.L.R. 165, Aes 5
al from the Supreme Court of South Australia (Full Court): Oertel r, (1947) S.A.S.R. 306, struck out as incompetent.
1 the Supreme Court of South Australia.
John Crocker, the landlord of premises let to Alfred srtel, brought an action in the Local Court of Adelaide successfully sought an order for recovery of possession
; 17
"
Mutnovnse,
Sept. 23, 24.
Pe Ie eee
a ae eR Ap
H. C. or A.
1947. eed Oprret v. Crocker.
HIGH COURT
of the premises. An appeal by the tenant to the Full Court South Australia was dismissed by a majority (Napier C.J. a Ligertwood J., Reed J. dissenting), though there was a conflict judicial opinion as to the precise nature of the tenancy. rent payable was thirty-five shillings per week, and it was e ground that the value of the dwelling house, the subject of t action, exceeded £300. It was, however, conceded that tl value of the tenant's interest in the property was less than amount. The tenant sought to appeal to the High Court right and alternatively asked for special leave to appeal. report is concerned only with the contention that the appeal J as of right.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate