NSW Caselaw
Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Rahman v Rahman (No 2) [2024] NSWCA 109 Hearing dates: 2 May 2024 Decision date: 02 May 2024 Before: Leeming JA at [1], [30], [34], [36]; White JA at [2], [39]; Mitchelmore JA at [33], [40] Decision: Summons filed 27 October 2023 dismissed with costs Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW — Whether applicant denied procedural fairness — Where nothing in transcript of hearing under review demonstrates that applicant was unable to put what he wished before the Court — Summons dismissed. Legislation Cited: Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW), s 18 Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), s 289VA District Court (Crimes Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW), ss 84(2)(b), 84(3), 93, 99, 99A District Court Act 1973 (NSW), s 176 Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), s 69 Cases Cited: Choi v NSW Ombudsman (2021) 104 NSWLR 505; [2021] NSWCA 68 Dogramaci v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2022] NSWCA 83 Dyason v Butterworth [2015] NSWCA 52 Singh v Hicks and Nissan [2021] NSWCA 80 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Fahmid Rahman (Applicant) Mita Farjina Rahman (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Applicant is self-represented M J Lewis with K Hooper (Respondent)
Solicitors: MIC Lawyers (Applicant) Nanette Reuben (Respondent) File Number(s): 2023/345709 Decision under appeal Court or tribunal: District Court of New South Wales Jurisdiction: Criminal Date of Decision: 14 August 2023 Before: Williams SC DCJ File Number(s): 2020/104318
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