NSW Caselaw
Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Tarar v Denwol Pty Limited [2014] NSWCA 301 Hearing dates: 13 August 2014 Decision date: 13 August 2014 Before: Emmett JA at [1] and [14]; Tobias AJA at [2] Decision: Summons seeking leave to appeal dismissed with costs. [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 - application for leave to appeal - appellate intervention not justified Category: Principal judgment Parties: Halil Tarar (Applicant) Denwol Pty Ltd (First Respondent) George Hay Pty Ltd (Second Respondent) Cranbrook Holdings Pty Ltd (Third Respondent) Alri Pty Ltd (Fifth Respondent) Representation: Counsel: In person (Applicant) B Hull (First, Second, Third, Fifth Respondents) Solicitors: Holman Webb Lawyers (First, Second, Third, Fifth Respondents) File Number(s): 2013/371821 Publication restriction: None Decision under appeal Jurisdiction: 9101 Date of Decision: 2013-11-15 00:00:00 Before: Gibb DCJ File Number(s): 2010/414183
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