Di Liristi v Matautia Developments Pty Ltd (No 3) [2021] NSWSC 660

Di Liristi v Matautia Developments Pty Ltd (No 3) [2021] NSWSC 660

Although the plaintiff's complaints about the conduct of the previous day's hearing had no substance and did not indicate that the judge had prejudged the case, fairness warranted allowing the self-represented plaintiff a short adjournment during the morning to seek legal advice, without adjourning the matter to another date.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure Procedural Ruling / Day 2 of Hearing; Application for Adjournment
Outcome
Hearing adjourned until 12.00pm.
Legal Topics
['adjournment' 'hearings' 'self Represented Litigants' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'judicial Conduct Complaint']
['civil Procedure'] ['adjournment' 'hearings' 'self Represented Litigants' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'judicial Conduct Complaint']

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 Procedural Ruling / Day 2 of Hearing; Application for Adjournment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the hearing should be adjourned so the self-represented plaintiff could seek legal advice and go to the Judicial Commission.' "Whether the plaintiff's complaints about the conduct of the hearing provided substance for adjourning or vacating the hearing."]

Ratio Decidendi

Although the plaintiff's complaints about the conduct of the previous day's hearing had no substance and did not indicate that the judge had prejudged the case, fairness warranted allowing the self-represented plaintiff a short adjournment during the morning to seek legal advice, without adjourning the matter to another date.

Court Disposition

Hearing adjourned until 12.00pm.

Orders

  • ['The matter is adjourned until 12.00pm.']