Jeffreys v Sheer [2025] NSWCA 6

Jeffreys v Sheer [2025] NSWCA 6

The appellant's application is refused because he failed to establish that it is in the interests of justice to make a pro bono referral in the circumstances, given his recent management of substantial financial resources, lack of up-to-date evidence of incapacity to pay for legal representation, risks of prejudice...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: Bruce Michael Jeffreys; Respondent: Itshak Sheer
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Application for Pro Bono Referral in Pending Appeal / Interlocutory (pre Appeal Hearing)
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Pro Bono Legal Assistance, Referral Scheme Under UCPR R 7.36, Appellate Procedure
Civil Procedure Pro Bono Legal Assistance Referral Scheme Under UCPR R 7.36 Appellate Procedure

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 17
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bruce Michael Jeffreys

Applicant

Itshak Sheer

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Pro Bono Referral in Pending Appeal / Interlocutory (pre Appeal Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to refer the appellant for pro bono legal assistance under Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 7.36
  2. 2 Whether the appeal discloses signs of merit
  3. 3 Whether a referral shortly before the hearing date would prejudice the respondent

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant's application is refused because he failed to establish that it is in the interests of justice to make a pro bono referral in the circumstances, given his recent management of substantial financial resources, lack of up-to-date evidence of incapacity to pay for legal representation, risks of prejudice to the respondent if the hearing is delayed, and the proximity of the appeal hearing date. The case does not warrant allocation of pro bono resources under r 7.36 UCPR.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The appellant's notice of motion eFiled on 17 January 2025 is dismissed.