Rahman v Rahman (No 1) [2024] NSWCA 108

Rahman v Rahman (No 1) [2024] NSWCA 108

Adjournment refused because, despite the same parties and similar originating circumstances, the two proceedings concerned separate issues, different evidence, and different decisions; efficiency or fairness did not warrant vacating the scheduled hearing.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 May 2024
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Application to Adjourn/vacate Hearing to Be Heard With Related Proceeding
Outcome
Notice of motion to adjourn dismissed; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['adjournment' 'judicial Review' 'apprehended Domestic Violence Orders']
['practice and Procedure'] ['adjournment' 'judicial Review' 'apprehended Domestic Violence Orders']

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

Judicial Review Application / Application to Adjourn/vacate Hearing to Be Heard With Related Proceeding

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the hearing should be adjourned and listed together with another proceeding involving the same parties but different issues and evidence' 'Whether efficiency or fairness warranted vacating the hearing date']

Ratio Decidendi

Adjournment refused because, despite the same parties and similar originating circumstances, the two proceedings concerned separate issues, different evidence, and different decisions; efficiency or fairness did not warrant vacating the scheduled hearing.

Court Disposition

Notice of motion to adjourn dismissed; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['Notice of motion filed 19 April 2024 dismissed.' 'Costs reserved.']