HACHEM v CIMIJOTTA [1996] NSWCA 238

HACHEM v CIMIJOTTA [1996] NSWCA 238

There was no denial of natural justice or want of procedural fairness as no adjournment was sought, all parties were aware of the sitting, and there was no evidence of injustice. The District Court had the jurisdiction and power to determine its own sitting times, as there was no statutory prescription to the contrary.

Parties
Appellant: Hachem; Respondent: Cimijotta
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 July 1996
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment of the Court of Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Denial of Natural Justice, Procedural Fairness, Jurisdiction on Court Sitting Hours, Exercise of Judicial Discretion, Damages Assessment
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Denial of Natural Justice Procedural Fairness Jurisdiction on Court Sitting Hours Exercise of Judicial Discretion Damages Assessment

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hachem

Appellant

Cimijotta

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment of the Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge's decision to sit past daylight hours and refusal to adjourn constitute denial of natural justice
  2. 2 Whether the District Court has power to sit beyond ordinary hours or after dark
  3. 3 Whether a new trial is warranted due to the exclusion of further evidence

Ratio Decidendi

There was no denial of natural justice or want of procedural fairness as no adjournment was sought, all parties were aware of the sitting, and there was no evidence of injustice. The District Court had the jurisdiction and power to determine its own sitting times, as there was no statutory prescription to the contrary.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.