Attorney General in and for the State of New South Wales v Markisic [2013] NSWSC 977

Attorney General in and for the State of New South Wales v Markisic [2013] NSWSC 977

The application for a further adjournment was refused because there was no sensible confidence that Mr Oliver Markisic would recover sufficiently within three months to participate, and the requirements of the Civil Procedure Act, including the overriding purpose, did not justify a further adjournment.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Adjournment Application Refused
Outcome
Adjournment application refused
Legal Topics
['adjournment Application' 'court Discretion' 'just, Quick and Cheap Resolution']
['civil Procedure'] ['adjournment Application' 'court Discretion' 'just, Quick and Cheap Resolution']

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

Interlocutory Application / Adjournment Application Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether Mr Dragan Markisic's application for a further adjournment should be granted"]

Ratio Decidendi

The application for a further adjournment was refused because there was no sensible confidence that Mr Oliver Markisic would recover sufficiently within three months to participate, and the requirements of the Civil Procedure Act, including the overriding purpose, did not justify a further adjournment.

Court Disposition

Adjournment application refused

Orders

  • ["Mr Dragan Markisic's further application for adjournment of the proceedings against him must be refused." 'Matter to be listed for short oral submissions to supplement written submissions.']