NSW Caselaw
MICHAEL v MITSOPOULOS
SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES — COURT OF APPEAL
MAHONEY JA 20 July 1992
[1992] NSWCA 154
Mahoney JA. This application arises out of a claim by a plaintiff against its engineer for negligence. The engineer cross-claimed, or brought out proceedings against, the architect.
Tam informed on 16-20 March 1992 the proceeding was determined so far as liability was concerned by Rolfe J. On 15 May 1992 his Honour gave judgment against the engineer and no order, based on negligence, was made against the architect.
Proceedings have now been taken to determine by a reference the damages to be paid by the engineer to the plaintiff.
On 10 July 1992 Cole J referred the matter for assessment of damages and I am told the assessment is to come on on 6 October 1992.
The present application arises because, when the engineer came to consider his position, and particularly his position in relation to the architect, there was, as I infer from the correspondence, some doubt as to whether the appropriateprocedure was an application for leave to appeal against the judgment of Rolfe J or a formal appeal.
It is not necessary for me to give attention to that matter. The fact is that the notice of appeal was filed out of time.
It is alleged by Miss Oakley that the last day for filing was 12 June 1992. It was not filed until 23 June 1992. However, it appears that the notice of appeal was tendered to the court prior to that date, albeit on a date which was then out of time, and it was, rightly or wrongly, rejected by the Court of Appeal registry. The result is, as I have indicated, that the notice of appeal was filed on 23 June 1992 rather than the date which was contended was the last day for filing it.
The application presently made is, on the one hand, to strike out the appeal as having been filed out of time and, on the other hand, a cross-motion brought by the engineer for the extension of time for the filing of the notice of appeal. It is, in effect, an application for an order nunc pro tunc that the notice of appeal already filed be treated as filed in time.
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