Qui v Balmoral Street Developments Pty Ltd [2023] NSWCATAP 60

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Qui v Balmoral Street Developments Pty Ltd [2023] NSWCATAP 60 Hearing dates: On the papers Date of orders: 28 February 2023 Decision date: 28 February 2023 Jurisdiction: Appeal Panel Before: A Suthers, Principal Member Decision: (1) A hearing of the appeal is dispensed with. (2) Leave to extend time to lodge the Notice of Appeal is refused. (3) The respondent is to lodge submissions and evidence in support of its costs application with the Appeal Registry and give them to the appellant within 14 days of the publication of these orders; (4) Any submissions and evidence in response to the costs application are to be lodged with the Appeal Registry and given to the respondent within 14 days thereafter. (5) Submissions on the application for costs are not to exceed five pages in length. (6) The Appeal Panel may dispense with a hearing and determine any application for costs on the basis of the written submissions and evidence provided. If the parties oppose this course they should make submissions on this issue when complying with the directions as to their submissions on the substantive costs application. Catchwords: APPEAL – significant delay in lodgment – insufficient apparent merit to warrant extension of time Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2014 (NSW) Strata Schemes (Freehold Development) Act 1973 (NSW) Strata Schemes Development Act 2015 (NSW) Cases Cited: Collins v Urban [2014] NSWCATAP 17 Gallo v Dawson (1990) HCA 30; 93 ALR 479 Giretti v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation (1996) 70 FCR 151 Jackamarra v Krakouer (1998) 195 CLR 516 Kelly v Szatow [2020] NSWSC 407 Kioa v West (1985) 159 CLR 550; [1985] HCA 81 Quader v Bell [2016] NSWSC 623 Rizk v FA Constructions Australia Pty Ltd (No 2) [2016] NSWCA 203 Ryan v BKB Motor Vehicle Repairs Pty Ltd [2017] NSWCATAP 39 Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services v Smith [2017] NSWCA 206 Stead v State Government Insurance Commission (1986) 161 CLR 141; [1986] HCA 54 Tomko v Palasty (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 369 Texts Cited: None cited Category: Principal judgment Parties: Chao Yi Qui (Appellant) Balmoral Street Developments Pty. Ltd. (Respondent) Representation: Solicitors: Self-represented (Appellant) Madison Marcus Law Firm (Respondent) File Number(s): 2022/00093770 Publication restriction: Nil Decision under appeal Court or tribunal: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Jurisdiction: Consumer and Commercial Division Citation: N/A Date of Decision: 9 December 2021 Before: D Robertson, Senior Member File Number(s): HB 21/03400