NSW Caselaw
Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Oakland Ops PL v Morrison [2023] NSWCATAP 134 Hearing dates: 14 February 2023 Date of orders: 17 May 2023 Decision date: 17 May 2023 Jurisdiction: Appeal Panel Before: A Suthers, Principal Member G K Burton SC, Senior Member Decision: 1. Grant leave to appeal to the extent that leave is required. 2.The appeal is allowed. 3. Remit RC 22/33608 to the Consumer and Commercial Division for hearing on such evidence as the parties file and serve in accordance with directions and the rules for that hearing. 4. Direct that the parties may rely without re-filing and re-service on documents already filed and served in RC 22/33608 that are clearly identified in a table that is filed and served in accord with directions and the rules for that hearing. 5. Grant leave to the appellant to rely upon the amended grounds of appeal filed at the hearing and to the extent necessary extend the time for filing such amended grounds to and including date of these orders. Catchwords: APPEAL – Residential (Land Lease) Communities – methodology of setting site fees under new site agreement – Residential (Land Lease) Communities Act 2013 (NSW) s 109(5), (6) – remitter to differently-constituted Tribunal Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2014 (NSW) Residential (Land Lease) Communities Act 2013 (NSW) Cases Cited: Carr v Western Australia (2007) 232 CLR 138 Chapman v Nicolosi [No 2] [2023] NSWCATAP 73 Collins v Urban [2014] NSWCATAP 17 Communications, Electrical, Electronic, Energy, Information, Postal, Plumbing and Allied Services Union of Australia v Qantas Airways Ltd (2020) 282 FCR 130 FCT v Consolidated Media Holdings Ltd (2012) 250 CLR 503 Hometown Australia Lennox PL v Bullivant [2022] NSWCATAP 161 Hometown Australia Lennox Australia PL v Schoenheimer [2023] NSWCATAP 128 Prendergast v Western Murray Irrigation Ltd [2014] NSWCATAP 69 Project Blue Sky v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355 R v Young (1999) 46 NSWLR 681 Texts Cited: Nil Category: Principal judgment Parties: Oakland Ops PL (Appellant) Ian Morrison (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Mr A Hochroft (Appellant) Respondent in person
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