NSW Caselaw
HOPE v THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BATHURST
SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES — COURT OF APPEAL
MAHONEY P, PRIESTLEY JA and HANDLEY JA 19 February 1996
[1996] NSWCA 250
Mahoney P. Mr Hope, to protect your position we would say this.
An application has been made to the Court in the terms which you have indicated. You have referred to what you regard as the second ground of appeal. The Court has indicated to you that one or more members of the Court do not think that they have power to do what you are asking, but that, if there is power to do it, the members of the Court do not think that this is a case in which it should be done.
That makes clear, as far as we may do, the position so far as the judgment is concerned. Insofar as you wish to do so you may convey that to the High Court.
That means that your application is dismissed with costs.
Orders accordingly.
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