NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Appeal
CITATION: HART v CASHMAN & EVERINGHAM [2010] NSWCA 5
HEARING DATE(S): 07/09/2009
JUDGMENT DATE: 9 February 2010
JUDGMENT OF: Handley AJA at 1
DECISION: The plaintiff's notice of motion of 31 July 2009 is dismissed with costs.
CATCHWORDS: PRACTICE and PROCEDURE – appeal – extension of time –intending appellant impecunious – prejudice to respondent - prospects of success required.
LEGISLATION CITED: Supreme Court Act
CATEGORY: Procedural and other rulings
Abalos v Australian Postal Commission [1990] HCA47; 170 CLR 167 Cole v The Commonwealth [1961] HCA 87; 106 CLR 653 Commercial Union Assurance Co. of Australia Ltd v Ferrcom Pty Ltd (1991) 22 NSWLR 389 Dearman v Dearman [1908] HCA 84; 7 CLR 549, Gallo v Dawson [1990] HCA 30; 64 ALJR 458 CASES CITED: General Steel Industries Inc. v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) [1964] HCA 69; 112 CLR 125 Jackamarra v Krakouer [1998] HCA 27; 195 CLR 516 Jones v Dunkel [1959] HCA 8; 101 CLR 298 Nikolaou v Papasavas Phillips & Co [1989] HCA 11; 166 CLR 394, 404 Smith v Chadwick (1884) 9 App Cas 187 Tomko v Palasty (No. 2) [2007] NSWCA 369, 71 NSWLR 61 Vakauta v Kelly [1989] HCA 44; 167 CLR 568
PARTIES: Barry Francis Hart - Appellant Peter Cashmand and Roland Everingham - t/as Cashman & Partners - Respondents
FILE NUMBER(S): CA 40465/2007
COUNSEL: J L Sharpe - Appellant D Nock SC & B Shields - Respondents
The People's Solicitors - Appellant SOLICITORS: HWL Ebsworth - Respondents
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