Touma v Saparas [2000] NSWCA 11

Touma v Saparas [2000] NSWCA 11

There was no denial of procedural fairness; the refusal to adjourn did not deprive the defendant of the opportunity to present his defence. Any prejudice was due to the defendant's own lack of preparation and decisions not to cross-examine or call evidence. The appeal should be dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 February 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['procedural Fairness' 'adjournment Applications']
['civil Procedure'] ['procedural Fairness' 'adjournment Applications']

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 Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether there was a denial of procedural fairness by refusal to adjourn the hearing at the appellant's request"]

Ratio Decidendi

There was no denial of procedural fairness; the refusal to adjourn did not deprive the defendant of the opportunity to present his defence. Any prejudice was due to the defendant's own lack of preparation and decisions not to cross-examine or call evidence. The appeal should be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed with costs.' 'The Mareva injunction granted in the District Court will continue until satisfaction of the judgment.']