Central Coast Animal Care Facility Incorporated v Wyatt [2022] NSWSC 1373

Central Coast Animal Care Facility Incorporated v Wyatt [2022] NSWSC 1373

The application for adjournment was refused and the application to set aside consent orders dismissed because the applicant, despite notice and opportunity, failed to provide admissible and testable evidence explaining her inability to appear, failed to appear or arrange representation, and there was prejudice to the other parties, the Court, and witnesses. In the interests of justice and the proper administration of case management, the absence of cogent explanation required dismissal of the application.

Parties
Plaintiff / Respondent to Motion: Central Coast Animal Care Facility Incorporated; First Defendant / Applicant on Motion: Janelle Marie Wyatt; Second Defendant: Troy Dean Wyatt
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 October 2022
Procedural Posture
Equity Applications List / Interlocutory; Determination of Notice of Motion for Adjournment and to Set Aside Consent Orders
Outcome
Application to adjourn refused; application to set aside consent orders dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Adjournment Applications, Set Aside Consent Orders, Case Management, Costs
Civil Procedure Adjournment Applications Set Aside Consent Orders Case Management Costs

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 5 Authorities cited 28 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Central Coast Animal Care Facility Incorporated

Plaintiff / Respondent to Motion

Janelle Marie Wyatt

First Defendant / Applicant on Motion

Troy Dean Wyatt

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Equity Applications List / Interlocutory; Determination of Notice of Motion for Adjournment and to Set Aside Consent Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to adjourn hearing of application to set aside consent orders on medical and personal grounds
  2. 2 Whether to dismiss the application to set aside consent orders for nonappearance of applicant
  3. 3 Principles applying to dismissal of interlocutory applications in absence of moving party

Ratio Decidendi

The application for adjournment was refused and the application to set aside consent orders dismissed because the applicant, despite notice and opportunity, failed to provide admissible and testable evidence explaining her inability to appear, failed to appear or arrange representation, and there was prejudice to the other parties, the Court, and witnesses. In the interests of justice and the proper administration of case management, the absence of cogent explanation required dismissal of the application.

Court Disposition

Application to adjourn refused; application to set aside consent orders dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Order that the application to adjourn today's hearing be refused.
  • Order that the application listed for hearing today being an application pursuant to order 3 in the Notice of Motion filed by the First Defendant on 27 October 2021 is dismissed with costs.