ROWETT and ANOR v WESTPAC BANKING CORPORATION [1994] NSWCA 273

ROWETT and ANOR v WESTPAC BANKING CORPORATION [1994] NSWCA 273

No error was shown in the trial judge’s conduct; he was not obliged to provide additional advice to the litigant in person acting on legal advice, and the manner of trial was appropriate. The application for discharge or variation of orders and consequential relief was refused.

Parties
Claimants: Rowett and ANOR; Opponent: Westpac Banking Corporation
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 March 1994
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Appellate Review of Interlocutory Orders
Outcome
Notice of Motion dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time for Appeal, Stay of Execution, Judicial Duties Toward Litigants in Person, Separate Hearing of Cross Claim
Civil Procedure Extension of Time for Appeal Stay of Execution Judicial Duties Toward Litigants in Person Separate Hearing of Cross Claim

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rowett and ANOR

Claimants

Westpac Banking Corporation

Opponent

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion / Appellate Review of Interlocutory Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred by not advising a litigant in person of consequences of withdrawing a cross-claim
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in ordering a separate hearing of the cross-claim
  3. 3 Whether time to appeal should be extended

Ratio Decidendi

No error was shown in the trial judge’s conduct; he was not obliged to provide additional advice to the litigant in person acting on legal advice, and the manner of trial was appropriate. The application for discharge or variation of orders and consequential relief was refused.

Court Disposition

Notice of Motion dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Notice of Motion dismissed with costs.