The identification of new legal arguments by fresh counsel, years after judgment and payment of the judgment debt, does not constitute a satisfactory explanation for delay in seeking an extension of time to appeal. The principle of finality of litigation, as articulated in D'Orta-Ekenaike v Victoria Legal Aid, weighs heavily against granting extensions in such circumstances, even where the proposed grounds of appeal have some merit. An undertaking not to seek recovery of moneys already paid reduces but does not eliminate prejudice to the respondent.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 26 later cases that cite this judgment.
12 of the 26 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.