NSW Caselaw
GRAHAM v ALUMA LITE PTY LIMITED SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES — COURT OF APPEAL
PRIESTLEY JA, CLARKE JA and COLE JA 13 February 1996
[1996] NSWCA 227
Priestley JA. The general way in which the Court is now approaching the point of irregularity that has been argued will be clear from what has taken place and passed between Mr McQuillen and the members of the Bench. Mr McQuillen is not to be criticised for raising the point in view of the way it developed as earlier mentioned.
On closer examination, however, we are all now of the view that we should not allow the notice of appeal to be amended to raise the matter which has just been argued. Our reasons will be explained in a little more detail when we give judgment on the entire appeal.
Clarke JA. I agree. Cole JA. I agree.
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