NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Appeal
CITATION : Erhard v Bhatia [2002] NSWCA 388 revised - 3/12/2002 FILE NUMBER(S) : CA 40487/01 HEARING DATE(S) : 04/11/02 JUDGMENT DATE : 3 December 2002
PARTIES : Bente Ravelle Erhard (Appellant) Satya Pal Bhatia (Respondent) JUDGMENT OF : Sheller JA at 1; Heydon JA at 2; Campbell J at 71
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : District Court LOWER COURT DC 5823/99 FILE NUMBER(S) : LOWER COURT Bowden ADCJ JUDICIAL OFFICER :
COUNSEL : Mr K P Rewell/Ms A Beardow (Appellant) Mr S D Kalfas (Respondent) SOLICITORS : Kells The Lawyers (Appellant) Mr David Brown (Respondent) CATCHWORDS : Courts - inferior courts - administration of justice - case management - right to be heard - dismissal of case for want of appearance - application for setting aside dismissal order - whether proper - relevant matters - paramountcy of administration of justice - D John v Rees [1970] 1 Ch 345 CASES CITED: Micallef v ICI Australia Operations Pty Ltd [2001] NSWCA 274 State of Queensland v J L Holdings Pty Ltd (1997) 189 CLR 146 DECISION : See paragraph 70
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL CA 40487/01 DC 5823/99
SHELLER JA HEYDON JA CAMPBELL J
3 December 2002 ERHARD v BHATIA
Courts – inferior courts – administration of justice – case management – right to be heard – dismissal of case for want of appearance – application for setting aside dismissal order – whether proper – relevant matters – paramountcy of administration of justice
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