Connam Pty Ltd as trustee for Christodoulou Family Trust v Lazarou [2019] NSWSC 1268

Connam Pty Ltd as trustee for Christodoulou Family Trust v Lazarou [2019] NSWSC 1268

The adjournment was refused because the applicants had not complied with the preparation timetable, had given inadequate grounds for adjournment, had provided no evidence explaining the nature or effect of the asserted illnesses, had not notified the Court before the hearing that the matter was not ready, and had not identified anything that would be achieved by an adjournment; granting an adjournment would have no utility and would not further the overriding purpose in s 56 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure Adjournment Application in Possession Proceedings / Hearing of Notice of Motion to Set Aside Default Judgment; Oral Application for Adjournment
Outcome
Application for adjournment refused.
Legal Topics
['adjournment' 'default Judgment' 'possession Proceedings' 'overriding Purpose']
['civil Procedure'] ['adjournment' 'default Judgment' 'possession Proceedings' 'overriding Purpose']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Civil Procedure Adjournment Application in Possession Proceedings / Hearing of Notice of Motion to Set Aside Default Judgment; Oral Application for Adjournment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the hearing of the notice of motion should be adjourned due to the asserted ill health of the applicants' instructing solicitor and counsel." 'Whether the applicants provided an adequate explanation or identified any utility in an adjournment.']

Ratio Decidendi

The adjournment was refused because the applicants had not complied with the preparation timetable, had given inadequate grounds for adjournment, had provided no evidence explaining the nature or effect of the asserted illnesses, had not notified the Court before the hearing that the matter was not ready, and had not identified anything that would be achieved by an adjournment; granting an adjournment would have no utility and would not further the overriding purpose in s 56 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW).

Court Disposition

Application for adjournment refused.

Orders

  • ['Application for adjournment refused.']