UCPR rr 51.10 – 51.15; Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101

General principles

Adam P Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd v Phillip Morris Inc (1981) 148 CLR 170; (1981) HCA 39 (no rigid rules of practice or exhaustive criteria governing the grant of leave to appeal)

PPK Willoughby Pty Ltd v Baird [2019] NSWCA 48 (applicant seeking leave to appeal from an order that they pay security for costs)

Be Financial Pty Ltd as Trustee for Be Financial Operations Trust v Das [2012] NSWCA 164 (where matter is set down for separate hearing of the leave application, it is the responsibility of counsel to ensure critical issues are properly raised in the summary of argument and relevant material is before the Court)

Carolan v AMF Bowling Pty Ltd [1995] NSWCA 69 (applicant must demonstrate more than that the trial judge was arguably wrong)

Collier v Lancer (No 2) [2013] NSWCA 186 (leave sought to appeal summary dismissal of proceedings; not granted where no substantial issue of principle, applicant was seeking to re-litigate issues determined in other proceedings)

Jaycar v Pty Ltd v Lombardo [2011] NSWCA 284 (leave to appeal on liability refused where small sum involved, no question of principle, no issue of general public interest, dispute had already consumed significant time and cost)

La La Land Byron Bay Pty Limited v The Independent Liquor and Gaming Authority [2015] NSWCA 254 (reasons required on refusal of leave are conventionally short, directed to why, having regard to the principles, the case is not an appropriate matter for the grant of leave; not required to give reasons as would be appropriate for full appellate determination)

Lee v New South Wales Crime Commission [2012] NSWCA 262 (leave for appeal granted where it was clear that the trial judge was incorrect and the applicants had suffered injustice)

Appeals from an interlocutory judgment or order

Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(e), s 101(2)(l)

Southern Cross Exploration NL v Fire & All Risks Insurance Co Ltd (No 2) (1990) 21 NSWLR 200 (whether an order is characterised as “final” or “interlocutory” depends on the legal, not practical, effect of the order; an order is final where the legal effect of the order finally disposes of the rights of the parties)

Rushby v Roberts (1983) 1 NSWLR 350 (orders made “until further notice”)

Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Haxton [2012] HCA 7 (judgment determining liability and leaving damages unresolved)

AB v State of New South Wales [2014] NSWCA 243 (order for summary dismissal)

Macatangay v State of New South Wales (No 2) [2009] NSWCA 272 (order for summary dismissal)

Leave where a small sum is in issue

Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(r); UCPR r 51.22

Gibson v Drumm [2016] NSWCA 206 (leave may be refused where a small amount is in issue, having regard to the appropriate allocation of court resources, disproportionate costs to the parties, case management principles)

Kassem v Colonial Mutual General Insurance Co Ltd [2001] NSWCA 38 (need ordinarily to conserve court time in small claims to matters involving issues of principle, questions of general public importance, or a reasonably clear injustice)

Gillard v Hunter Wire Products Pty Ltd (t/as Hunter Screen Products) (No 2) [2001] NSWCA 450 (the realistic value of the matter in contest in the appeal must exceed $100,000 pursuant to Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(r)(i), otherwise leave to appeal is required)

Pawlowska v Zajglic [2011] NSWCA 118 (not realistic that appellant would improve their entitlement by at least $100,000 therefore leave was required; notice of appeal filed purportedly as of right struck out as incompetent)

Boulos v Martin (No 3) [2012] NSWCA 162 (the fact that an appeal document is accepted for filing in the Registry does not substantiate the existence of an appeal as of right; onus on applicant under UCPR r 51.22 to file affidavit demonstrating that leave is not required, which was not done here)

Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981 (NSW)

Application of PFC [2016] NSWCA 102 (leave to appeal required as applicant in custody for serious indictable offences; not granted where proposed appeal had no prospects of success)

UCPR rr 51.10 – 51.15; Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101

General principles

Adam P Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd v Phillip Morris Inc (1981) 148 CLR 170; (1981) HCA 39 (no rigid rules of practice or exhaustive criteria governing the grant of leave to appeal)

PPK Willoughby Pty Ltd v Baird [2019] NSWCA 48 (applicant seeking leave to appeal from an order that they pay security for costs)

Be Financial Pty Ltd as Trustee for Be Financial Operations Trust v Das [2012] NSWCA 164 (where matter is set down for separate hearing of the leave application, it is the responsibility of counsel to ensure critical issues are properly raised in the summary of argument and relevant material is before the Court)

Carolan v AMF Bowling Pty Ltd [1995] NSWCA 69 (applicant must demonstrate more than that the trial judge was arguably wrong)

Collier v Lancer (No 2) [2013] NSWCA 186 (leave sought to appeal summary dismissal of proceedings; not granted where no substantial issue of principle, applicant was seeking to re-litigate issues determined in other proceedings)

Jaycar v Pty Ltd v Lombardo [2011] NSWCA 284 (leave to appeal on liability refused where small sum involved, no question of principle, no issue of general public interest, dispute had already consumed significant time and cost)

La La Land Byron Bay Pty Limited v The Independent Liquor and Gaming Authority [2015] NSWCA 254 (reasons required on refusal of leave are conventionally short, directed to why, having regard to the principles, the case is not an appropriate matter for the grant of leave; not required to give reasons as would be appropriate for full appellate determination)

Lee v New South Wales Crime Commission [2012] NSWCA 262 (leave for appeal granted where it was clear that the trial judge was incorrect and the applicants had suffered injustice)

Appeals from an interlocutory judgment or order

Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(e), s 101(2)(l)

Southern Cross Exploration NL v Fire & All Risks Insurance Co Ltd (No 2) (1990) 21 NSWLR 200 (whether an order is characterised as “final” or “interlocutory” depends on the legal, not practical, effect of the order; an order is final where the legal effect of the order finally disposes of the rights of the parties)

Rushby v Roberts (1983) 1 NSWLR 350 (orders made “until further notice”)

Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Haxton [2012] HCA 7 (judgment determining liability and leaving damages unresolved)

AB v State of New South Wales [2014] NSWCA 243 (order for summary dismissal)

Macatangay v State of New South Wales (No 2) [2009] NSWCA 272 (order for summary dismissal)

Leave where a small sum is in issue

Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(r); UCPR r 51.22

Gibson v Drumm [2016] NSWCA 206 (leave may be refused where a small amount is in issue, having regard to the appropriate allocation of court resources, disproportionate costs to the parties, case management principles)

Kassem v Colonial Mutual General Insurance Co Ltd [2001] NSWCA 38 (need ordinarily to conserve court time in small claims to matters involving issues of principle, questions of general public importance, or a reasonably clear injustice)

Gillard v Hunter Wire Products Pty Ltd (t/as Hunter Screen Products) (No 2) [2001] NSWCA 450 (the realistic value of the matter in contest in the appeal must exceed $100,000 pursuant to Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(r)(i), otherwise leave to appeal is required)

Pawlowska v Zajglic [2011] NSWCA 118 (not realistic that appellant would improve their entitlement by at least $100,000 therefore leave was required; notice of appeal filed purportedly as of right struck out as incompetent)

Boulos v Martin (No 3) [2012] NSWCA 162 (the fact that an appeal document is accepted for filing in the Registry does not substantiate the existence of an appeal as of right; onus on applicant under UCPR r 51.22 to file affidavit demonstrating that leave is not required, which was not done here)

Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981 (NSW)

Application of PFC [2016] NSWCA 102 (leave to appeal required as applicant in custody for serious indictable offences; not granted where proposed appeal had no prospects of success)

UCPR rr 51.10 – 51.15; Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101

General principles

Adam P Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd v Phillip Morris Inc (1981) 148 CLR 170; (1981) HCA 39 (no rigid rules of practice or exhaustive criteria governing the grant of leave to appeal)

PPK Willoughby Pty Ltd v Baird [2019] NSWCA 48 (applicant seeking leave to appeal from an order that they pay security for costs)

Be Financial Pty Ltd as Trustee for Be Financial Operations Trust v Das [2012] NSWCA 164 (where matter is set down for separate hearing of the leave application, it is the responsibility of counsel to ensure critical issues are properly raised in the summary of argument and relevant material is before the Court)

Carolan v AMF Bowling Pty Ltd [1995] NSWCA 69 (applicant must demonstrate more than that the trial judge was arguably wrong)

Collier v Lancer (No 2) [2013] NSWCA 186 (leave sought to appeal summary dismissal of proceedings; not granted where no substantial issue of principle, applicant was seeking to re-litigate issues determined in other proceedings)

Jaycar v Pty Ltd v Lombardo [2011] NSWCA 284 (leave to appeal on liability refused where small sum involved, no question of principle, no issue of general public interest, dispute had already consumed significant time and cost)

La La Land Byron Bay Pty Limited v The Independent Liquor and Gaming Authority [2015] NSWCA 254 (reasons required on refusal of leave are conventionally short, directed to why, having regard to the principles, the case is not an appropriate matter for the grant of leave; not required to give reasons as would be appropriate for full appellate determination)

Lee v New South Wales Crime Commission [2012] NSWCA 262 (leave for appeal granted where it was clear that the trial judge was incorrect and the applicants had suffered injustice)

Appeals from an interlocutory judgment or order

Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(e), s 101(2)(l)

Southern Cross Exploration NL v Fire & All Risks Insurance Co Ltd (No 2) (1990) 21 NSWLR 200 (whether an order is characterised as “final” or “interlocutory” depends on the legal, not practical, effect of the order; an order is final where the legal effect of the order finally disposes of the rights of the parties)

Rushby v Roberts (1983) 1 NSWLR 350 (orders made “until further notice”)

Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Haxton [2012] HCA 7 (judgment determining liability and leaving damages unresolved)

AB v State of New South Wales [2014] NSWCA 243 (order for summary dismissal)

Macatangay v State of New South Wales (No 2) [2009] NSWCA 272 (order for summary dismissal)

Leave where a small sum is in issue

Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(r); UCPR r 51.22

Gibson v Drumm [2016] NSWCA 206 (leave may be refused where a small amount is in issue, having regard to the appropriate allocation of court resources, disproportionate costs to the parties, case management principles)

Kassem v Colonial Mutual General Insurance Co Ltd [2001] NSWCA 38 (need ordinarily to conserve court time in small claims to matters involving issues of principle, questions of general public importance, or a reasonably clear injustice)

Gillard v Hunter Wire Products Pty Ltd (t/as Hunter Screen Products) (No 2) [2001] NSWCA 450 (the realistic value of the matter in contest in the appeal must exceed $100,000 pursuant to Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(r)(i), otherwise leave to appeal is required)

Pawlowska v Zajglic [2011] NSWCA 118 (not realistic that appellant would improve their entitlement by at least $100,000 therefore leave was required; notice of appeal filed purportedly as of right struck out as incompetent)

Boulos v Martin (No 3) [2012] NSWCA 162 (the fact that an appeal document is accepted for filing in the Registry does not substantiate the existence of an appeal as of right; onus on applicant under UCPR r 51.22 to file affidavit demonstrating that leave is not required, which was not done here)

Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981 (NSW)

Application of PFC [2016] NSWCA 102 (leave to appeal required as applicant in custody for serious indictable offences; not granted where proposed appeal had no prospects of success)

UCPR rr 51.10 – 51.15; Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101

General principles

Adam P Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd v Phillip Morris Inc (1981) 148 CLR 170; (1981) HCA 39 (no rigid rules of practice or exhaustive criteria governing the grant of leave to appeal)

PPK Willoughby Pty Ltd v Baird [2019] NSWCA 48 (applicant seeking leave to appeal from an order that they pay security for costs)

Be Financial Pty Ltd as Trustee for Be Financial Operations Trust v Das [2012] NSWCA 164 (where matter is set down for separate hearing of the leave application, it is the responsibility of counsel to ensure critical issues are properly raised in the summary of argument and relevant material is before the Court)

Carolan v AMF Bowling Pty Ltd [1995] NSWCA 69 (applicant must demonstrate more than that the trial judge was arguably wrong)

Collier v Lancer (No 2) [2013] NSWCA 186 (leave sought to appeal summary dismissal of proceedings; not granted where no substantial issue of principle, applicant was seeking to re-litigate issues determined in other proceedings)

Jaycar v Pty Ltd v Lombardo [2011] NSWCA 284 (leave to appeal on liability refused where small sum involved, no question of principle, no issue of general public interest, dispute had already consumed significant time and cost)

La La Land Byron Bay Pty Limited v The Independent Liquor and Gaming Authority [2015] NSWCA 254 (reasons required on refusal of leave are conventionally short, directed to why, having regard to the principles, the case is not an appropriate matter for the grant of leave; not required to give reasons as would be appropriate for full appellate determination)

Lee v New South Wales Crime Commission [2012] NSWCA 262 (leave for appeal granted where it was clear that the trial judge was incorrect and the applicants had suffered injustice)

Appeals from an interlocutory judgment or order

Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(e), s 101(2)(l)

Southern Cross Exploration NL v Fire & All Risks Insurance Co Ltd (No 2) (1990) 21 NSWLR 200 (whether an order is characterised as “final” or “interlocutory” depends on the legal, not practical, effect of the order; an order is final where the legal effect of the order finally disposes of the rights of the parties)

Rushby v Roberts (1983) 1 NSWLR 350 (orders made “until further notice”)

Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Haxton [2012] HCA 7 (judgment determining liability and leaving damages unresolved)

AB v State of New South Wales [2014] NSWCA 243 (order for summary dismissal)

Macatangay v State of New South Wales (No 2) [2009] NSWCA 272 (order for summary dismissal)

Leave where a small sum is in issue

Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(r); UCPR r 51.22

Gibson v Drumm [2016] NSWCA 206 (leave may be refused where a small amount is in issue, having regard to the appropriate allocation of court resources, disproportionate costs to the parties, case management principles)

Kassem v Colonial Mutual General Insurance Co Ltd [2001] NSWCA 38 (need ordinarily to conserve court time in small claims to matters involving issues of principle, questions of general public importance, or a reasonably clear injustice)

Gillard v Hunter Wire Products Pty Ltd (t/as Hunter Screen Products) (No 2) [2001] NSWCA 450 (the realistic value of the matter in contest in the appeal must exceed $100,000 pursuant to Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(r)(i), otherwise leave to appeal is required)

Pawlowska v Zajglic [2011] NSWCA 118 (not realistic that appellant would improve their entitlement by at least $100,000 therefore leave was required; notice of appeal filed purportedly as of right struck out as incompetent)

Boulos v Martin (No 3) [2012] NSWCA 162 (the fact that an appeal document is accepted for filing in the Registry does not substantiate the existence of an appeal as of right; onus on applicant under UCPR r 51.22 to file affidavit demonstrating that leave is not required, which was not done here)

Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981 (NSW)

Application of PFC [2016] NSWCA 102 (leave to appeal required as applicant in custody for serious indictable offences; not granted where proposed appeal had no prospects of success)

UCPR rr 51.10 – 51.15; Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101

General principles

Adam P Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd v Phillip Morris Inc (1981) 148 CLR 170; (1981) HCA 39 (no rigid rules of practice or exhaustive criteria governing the grant of leave to appeal)

PPK Willoughby Pty Ltd v Baird [2019] NSWCA 48 (applicant seeking leave to appeal from an order that they pay security for costs)

Be Financial Pty Ltd as Trustee for Be Financial Operations Trust v Das [2012] NSWCA 164 (where matter is set down for separate hearing of the leave application, it is the responsibility of counsel to ensure critical issues are properly raised in the summary of argument and relevant material is before the Court)

Carolan v AMF Bowling Pty Ltd [1995] NSWCA 69 (applicant must demonstrate more than that the trial judge was arguably wrong)

Collier v Lancer (No 2) [2013] NSWCA 186 (leave sought to appeal summary dismissal of proceedings; not granted where no substantial issue of principle, applicant was seeking to re-litigate issues determined in other proceedings)

Jaycar v Pty Ltd v Lombardo [2011] NSWCA 284 (leave to appeal on liability refused where small sum involved, no question of principle, no issue of general public interest, dispute had already consumed significant time and cost)

La La Land Byron Bay Pty Limited v The Independent Liquor and Gaming Authority [2015] NSWCA 254 (reasons required on refusal of leave are conventionally short, directed to why, having regard to the principles, the case is not an appropriate matter for the grant of leave; not required to give reasons as would be appropriate for full appellate determination)

Lee v New South Wales Crime Commission [2012] NSWCA 262 (leave for appeal granted where it was clear that the trial judge was incorrect and the applicants had suffered injustice)

Appeals from an interlocutory judgment or order

Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(e), s 101(2)(l)

Southern Cross Exploration NL v Fire & All Risks Insurance Co Ltd (No 2) (1990) 21 NSWLR 200 (whether an order is characterised as “final” or “interlocutory” depends on the legal, not practical, effect of the order; an order is final where the legal effect of the order finally disposes of the rights of the parties)

Rushby v Roberts (1983) 1 NSWLR 350 (orders made “until further notice”)

Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Haxton [2012] HCA 7 (judgment determining liability and leaving damages unresolved)

AB v State of New South Wales [2014] NSWCA 243 (order for summary dismissal)

Macatangay v State of New South Wales (No 2) [2009] NSWCA 272 (order for summary dismissal)

Leave where a small sum is in issue

Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(r); UCPR r 51.22

Gibson v Drumm [2016] NSWCA 206 (leave may be refused where a small amount is in issue, having regard to the appropriate allocation of court resources, disproportionate costs to the parties, case management principles)

Kassem v Colonial Mutual General Insurance Co Ltd [2001] NSWCA 38 (need ordinarily to conserve court time in small claims to matters involving issues of principle, questions of general public importance, or a reasonably clear injustice)

Gillard v Hunter Wire Products Pty Ltd (t/as Hunter Screen Products) (No 2) [2001] NSWCA 450 (the realistic value of the matter in contest in the appeal must exceed $100,000 pursuant to Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(r)(i), otherwise leave to appeal is required)

Pawlowska v Zajglic [2011] NSWCA 118 (not realistic that appellant would improve their entitlement by at least $100,000 therefore leave was required; notice of appeal filed purportedly as of right struck out as incompetent)

Boulos v Martin (No 3) [2012] NSWCA 162 (the fact that an appeal document is accepted for filing in the Registry does not substantiate the existence of an appeal as of right; onus on applicant under UCPR r 51.22 to file affidavit demonstrating that leave is not required, which was not done here)

Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981 (NSW)

Application of PFC [2016] NSWCA 102 (leave to appeal required as applicant in custody for serious indictable offences; not granted where proposed appeal had no prospects of success)

UCPR rr 51.10 – 51.15; Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101

General principles

Adam P Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd v Phillip Morris Inc (1981) 148 CLR 170; (1981) HCA 39 (no rigid rules of practice or exhaustive criteria governing the grant of leave to appeal)

PPK Willoughby Pty Ltd v Baird [2019] NSWCA 48 (applicant seeking leave to appeal from an order that they pay security for costs)

Be Financial Pty Ltd as Trustee for Be Financial Operations Trust v Das [2012] NSWCA 164 (where matter is set down for separate hearing of the leave application, it is the responsibility of counsel to ensure critical issues are properly raised in the summary of argument and relevant material is before the Court)

Carolan v AMF Bowling Pty Ltd [1995] NSWCA 69 (applicant must demonstrate more than that the trial judge was arguably wrong)

Collier v Lancer (No 2) [2013] NSWCA 186 (leave sought to appeal summary dismissal of proceedings; not granted where no substantial issue of principle, applicant was seeking to re-litigate issues determined in other proceedings)

Jaycar v Pty Ltd v Lombardo [2011] NSWCA 284 (leave to appeal on liability refused where small sum involved, no question of principle, no issue of general public interest, dispute had already consumed significant time and cost)

La La Land Byron Bay Pty Limited v The Independent Liquor and Gaming Authority [2015] NSWCA 254 (reasons required on refusal of leave are conventionally short, directed to why, having regard to the principles, the case is not an appropriate matter for the grant of leave; not required to give reasons as would be appropriate for full appellate determination)

Lee v New South Wales Crime Commission [2012] NSWCA 262 (leave for appeal granted where it was clear that the trial judge was incorrect and the applicants had suffered injustice)

Appeals from an interlocutory judgment or order

Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(e), s 101(2)(l)

Southern Cross Exploration NL v Fire & All Risks Insurance Co Ltd (No 2) (1990) 21 NSWLR 200 (whether an order is characterised as “final” or “interlocutory” depends on the legal, not practical, effect of the order; an order is final where the legal effect of the order finally disposes of the rights of the parties)

Rushby v Roberts (1983) 1 NSWLR 350 (orders made “until further notice”)

Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Haxton [2012] HCA 7 (judgment determining liability and leaving damages unresolved)

AB v State of New South Wales [2014] NSWCA 243 (order for summary dismissal)

Macatangay v State of New South Wales (No 2) [2009] NSWCA 272 (order for summary dismissal)

Leave where a small sum is in issue

Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(r); UCPR r 51.22

Gibson v Drumm [2016] NSWCA 206 (leave may be refused where a small amount is in issue, having regard to the appropriate allocation of court resources, disproportionate costs to the parties, case management principles)

Kassem v Colonial Mutual General Insurance Co Ltd [2001] NSWCA 38 (need ordinarily to conserve court time in small claims to matters involving issues of principle, questions of general public importance, or a reasonably clear injustice)

Gillard v Hunter Wire Products Pty Ltd (t/as Hunter Screen Products) (No 2) [2001] NSWCA 450 (the realistic value of the matter in contest in the appeal must exceed $100,000 pursuant to Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(r)(i), otherwise leave to appeal is required)

Pawlowska v Zajglic [2011] NSWCA 118 (not realistic that appellant would improve their entitlement by at least $100,000 therefore leave was required; notice of appeal filed purportedly as of right struck out as incompetent)

Boulos v Martin (No 3) [2012] NSWCA 162 (the fact that an appeal document is accepted for filing in the Registry does not substantiate the existence of an appeal as of right; onus on applicant under UCPR r 51.22 to file affidavit demonstrating that leave is not required, which was not done here)

Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981 (NSW)

Application of PFC [2016] NSWCA 102 (leave to appeal required as applicant in custody for serious indictable offences; not granted where proposed appeal had no prospects of success)

UCPR rr 51.10 – 51.15; Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101

General principles

Adam P Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd v Phillip Morris Inc (1981) 148 CLR 170; (1981) HCA 39 (no rigid rules of practice or exhaustive criteria governing the grant of leave to appeal)

PPK Willoughby Pty Ltd v Baird [2019] NSWCA 48 (applicant seeking leave to appeal from an order that they pay security for costs)

Be Financial Pty Ltd as Trustee for Be Financial Operations Trust v Das [2012] NSWCA 164 (where matter is set down for separate hearing of the leave application, it is the responsibility of counsel to ensure critical issues are properly raised in the summary of argument and relevant material is before the Court)

Carolan v AMF Bowling Pty Ltd [1995] NSWCA 69 (applicant must demonstrate more than that the trial judge was arguably wrong)

Collier v Lancer (No 2) [2013] NSWCA 186 (leave sought to appeal summary dismissal of proceedings; not granted where no substantial issue of principle, applicant was seeking to re-litigate issues determined in other proceedings)

Jaycar v Pty Ltd v Lombardo [2011] NSWCA 284 (leave to appeal on liability refused where small sum involved, no question of principle, no issue of general public interest, dispute had already consumed significant time and cost)

La La Land Byron Bay Pty Limited v The Independent Liquor and Gaming Authority [2015] NSWCA 254 (reasons required on refusal of leave are conventionally short, directed to why, having regard to the principles, the case is not an appropriate matter for the grant of leave; not required to give reasons as would be appropriate for full appellate determination)

Lee v New South Wales Crime Commission [2012] NSWCA 262 (leave for appeal granted where it was clear that the trial judge was incorrect and the applicants had suffered injustice)

Appeals from an interlocutory judgment or order

Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(e), s 101(2)(l)

Southern Cross Exploration NL v Fire & All Risks Insurance Co Ltd (No 2) (1990) 21 NSWLR 200 (whether an order is characterised as “final” or “interlocutory” depends on the legal, not practical, effect of the order; an order is final where the legal effect of the order finally disposes of the rights of the parties)

Rushby v Roberts (1983) 1 NSWLR 350 (orders made “until further notice”)

Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Haxton [2012] HCA 7 (judgment determining liability and leaving damages unresolved)

AB v State of New South Wales [2014] NSWCA 243 (order for summary dismissal)

Macatangay v State of New South Wales (No 2) [2009] NSWCA 272 (order for summary dismissal)

Leave where a small sum is in issue

Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(r); UCPR r 51.22

Gibson v Drumm [2016] NSWCA 206 (leave may be refused where a small amount is in issue, having regard to the appropriate allocation of court resources, disproportionate costs to the parties, case management principles)

Kassem v Colonial Mutual General Insurance Co Ltd [2001] NSWCA 38 (need ordinarily to conserve court time in small claims to matters involving issues of principle, questions of general public importance, or a reasonably clear injustice)

Gillard v Hunter Wire Products Pty Ltd (t/as Hunter Screen Products) (No 2) [2001] NSWCA 450 (the realistic value of the matter in contest in the appeal must exceed $100,000 pursuant to Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(r)(i), otherwise leave to appeal is required)

Pawlowska v Zajglic [2011] NSWCA 118 (not realistic that appellant would improve their entitlement by at least $100,000 therefore leave was required; notice of appeal filed purportedly as of right struck out as incompetent)

Boulos v Martin (No 3) [2012] NSWCA 162 (the fact that an appeal document is accepted for filing in the Registry does not substantiate the existence of an appeal as of right; onus on applicant under UCPR r 51.22 to file affidavit demonstrating that leave is not required, which was not done here)

Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981 (NSW)

Application of PFC [2016] NSWCA 102 (leave to appeal required as applicant in custody for serious indictable offences; not granted where proposed appeal had no prospects of success)

UCPR rr 51.10 – 51.15; Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101

General principles

Adam P Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd v Phillip Morris Inc (1981) 148 CLR 170; (1981) HCA 39 (no rigid rules of practice or exhaustive criteria governing the grant of leave to appeal)

PPK Willoughby Pty Ltd v Baird [2019] NSWCA 48 (applicant seeking leave to appeal from an order that they pay security for costs)

Be Financial Pty Ltd as Trustee for Be Financial Operations Trust v Das [2012] NSWCA 164 (where matter is set down for separate hearing of the leave application, it is the responsibility of counsel to ensure critical issues are properly raised in the summary of argument and relevant material is before the Court)

Carolan v AMF Bowling Pty Ltd [1995] NSWCA 69 (applicant must demonstrate more than that the trial judge was arguably wrong)

Collier v Lancer (No 2) [2013] NSWCA 186 (leave sought to appeal summary dismissal of proceedings; not granted where no substantial issue of principle, applicant was seeking to re-litigate issues determined in other proceedings)

Jaycar v Pty Ltd v Lombardo [2011] NSWCA 284 (leave to appeal on liability refused where small sum involved, no question of principle, no issue of general public interest, dispute had already consumed significant time and cost)

La La Land Byron Bay Pty Limited v The Independent Liquor and Gaming Authority [2015] NSWCA 254 (reasons required on refusal of leave are conventionally short, directed to why, having regard to the principles, the case is not an appropriate matter for the grant of leave; not required to give reasons as would be appropriate for full appellate determination)

Lee v New South Wales Crime Commission [2012] NSWCA 262 (leave for appeal granted where it was clear that the trial judge was incorrect and the applicants had suffered injustice)

Appeals from an interlocutory judgment or order

Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(e), s 101(2)(l)

Southern Cross Exploration NL v Fire & All Risks Insurance Co Ltd (No 2) (1990) 21 NSWLR 200 (whether an order is characterised as “final” or “interlocutory” depends on the legal, not practical, effect of the order; an order is final where the legal effect of the order finally disposes of the rights of the parties)

Rushby v Roberts (1983) 1 NSWLR 350 (orders made “until further notice”)

Equuscorp Pty Ltd v Haxton [2012] HCA 7 (judgment determining liability and leaving damages unresolved)

AB v State of New South Wales [2014] NSWCA 243 (order for summary dismissal)

Macatangay v State of New South Wales (No 2) [2009] NSWCA 272 (order for summary dismissal)

Leave where a small sum is in issue

Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(r); UCPR r 51.22

Gibson v Drumm [2016] NSWCA 206 (leave may be refused where a small amount is in issue, having regard to the appropriate allocation of court resources, disproportionate costs to the parties, case management principles)

Kassem v Colonial Mutual General Insurance Co Ltd [2001] NSWCA 38 (need ordinarily to conserve court time in small claims to matters involving issues of principle, questions of general public importance, or a reasonably clear injustice)

Gillard v Hunter Wire Products Pty Ltd (t/as Hunter Screen Products) (No 2) [2001] NSWCA 450 (the realistic value of the matter in contest in the appeal must exceed $100,000 pursuant to Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) s 101(2)(r)(i), otherwise leave to appeal is required)

Pawlowska v Zajglic [2011] NSWCA 118 (not realistic that appellant would improve their entitlement by at least $100,000 therefore leave was required; notice of appeal filed purportedly as of right struck out as incompetent)

Boulos v Martin (No 3) [2012] NSWCA 162 (the fact that an appeal document is accepted for filing in the Registry does not substantiate the existence of an appeal as of right; onus on applicant under UCPR r 51.22 to file affidavit demonstrating that leave is not required, which was not done here)

Felons (Civil Proceedings) Act 1981 (NSW)

Application of PFC [2016] NSWCA 102 (leave to appeal required as applicant in custody for serious indictable offences; not granted where proposed appeal had no prospects of success)