Romeo v De Chiara Constructions Pty Limited [2012] NSWCA 190

Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Romeo v De Chiara Constructions Pty Limited [2012] NSWCA 190 Hearing dates: 21 June 2012 Decision date: 21 June 2012 Before: Macfarlan JA at [1]; Meagher JA at [2] Decision: (1)The applicant is granted an extension of time to file and serve a notice of appeal which excludes grounds 1 to 5 inclusive and order 2(1) as sought but is otherwise in the form of annexure A to the affidavit of Damian Phair sworn 21 June 2012. (2)The applicant to pay the first respondent's costs thrown away by the filing and prosecution of the summons seeking leave to appeal. (3)The costs of the application for an extension of time to file and serve a notice of appeal be costs in the appeal. (4)The reference to "proceedings" in the grounds of appeal in order (1) is to proceedings on the claim and cross-claim before Olsson DCJ. [Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.] Catchwords: APPEAL - practice and procedure - appeal out of time - application for extension of time - no question of principle Legislation Cited: Bankruptcy Act 1966 (Cth) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules Cases Cited: Beneficial Insurance Co v Hamilton (1985) 73 FLR 347 Campbell v Metway Leasing Ltd [2001] FCA 1311; 188 ALR 100 John v Neiman Holdings Pty Ltd (1986) 84 FLR 84 Tomko v Palasty (No 2) [2007] NSWCA 369; 71 NSWLR 61 Texts Cited: McDonald, Henry & Meek, Australian Bankruptcy Law & Practice, 6th ed (loose-leaf) Thomson Reuters Category: Interlocutory applications Parties: Giuseppe Romeo (Applicant) De Chiara Constructions Pty Ltd (First Respondent) Anna Maria Romeo (Second Respondent) Representation: Counsel: R E Dubler SC (Applicant) M R Pesman (First Respondent) No appearance (Second Respondent) Solicitors: Proctor Phair Lawyers Tully & Chiper Lawyers No appearance (Second Respondent) File Number(s): CA 2012/72704 Decision under appeal Jurisdiction: 9101 Date of Decision: 2011-12-05 00:00:00 Before: Olsson DCJ File Number(s): 2010/100571