Tanious v NSW Land & Housing Corporation [2021] NSWSC 807

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Tanious v NSW Land & Housing Corporation [2021] NSWSC 807 Hearing dates: 30 June 2021 Date of orders: 30 June 2021 Decision date: 30 June 2021 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Garling J Decision: (1) Leave to appeal refused. (2) Summons filed 24 February 2021 is dismissed. (3) No order for costs. Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – leave to appeal against a decision of the Appeal Panel of NCAT – question of law – no question – no error found – summons dismissed Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 Evidence Act 1995 Cases Cited: Corcoran v Far [2019] NSWSC 1284 Texts Cited: Not Applicable Category: Principal judgment Parties: Mofeed Tanious (Applicant) NSW Land & Housing Corporation (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Self-represented (Applicant) G Faramarzi (Respondent) File Number(s): 2021/52933 Publication restriction: Not Applicable Decision under appeal Court or tribunal: NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal Jurisdiction: Appeal Panel Date of Decision: 2 February 2021 Before: Principal Member Suthers; Senior Member Currie File Number(s): 2020/47050

EX TEMPORE Judgment 1. On 24 February 2021, the plaintiff, Mofeed Tanious, filed a Summons seeking leave to appeal and commencing an appeal in respect of a decision of 2 February 2021 made by the Appeal Panel of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal ("NCAT"). The defendant is the NSW Land and Housing Corporation. 2. The Summons sought the following orders in these terms: 1. Leave to appeal from the whole of the decision below. 2. Appeal to be allowed. Alternatively extending the time until final judgment from the honourable High Court of Australia come up in case number S35/2020. 3. Direct contact the honourable High Court Justice concerning judgment in the case S35/2020 because there was no judgment in support for that faked certificate of Deemed Abandonment which was dated on 1 September 2020. 4. No order for cost because defendant did not look for any costs previously.