Sinanovic v Bone [2025] NSWSC 144

Sinanovic v Bone [2025] NSWSC 144

Leave is refused because the Plaintiff's preference not to instruct a lawyer is based on loss of faith in lawyers rather than impecuniosity or other exceptional circumstance. There is no evidence Mr Sinanovic cannot retain legal representation. The seriousness of the allegations in the case heightens the importance of professional legal representation. Exceptional circumstances justifying lay representation are not demonstrated.

Parties
Plaintiff: Hakija Sinanovic; Defendant: Lunden Bone
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Local Court Decision (civil / Common Law) / Interlocutory Application (leave for Lay Representation)
Outcome
Application for leave for lay representation dismissed; costs ordered against Plaintiff; matter stood over.
Legal Topics
Leave for Lay Representative, Representation of Parties, Role of Lay Advocates, Exceptional Circumstances for Non Lawyer Representation, Costs in Interlocutory Applications
Civil Procedure Leave for Lay Representative Representation of Parties Role of Lay Advocates Exceptional Circumstances for Non Lawyer Representation Costs in Interlocutory 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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hakija Sinanovic

Plaintiff

Lunden Bone

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Local Court Decision (civil / Common Law) / Interlocutory Application (leave for Lay Representation)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court should grant leave for a non-lawyer (lay advocate) to represent the plaintiff in proceedings before the Supreme Court of New South Wales

Ratio Decidendi

Leave is refused because the Plaintiff's preference not to instruct a lawyer is based on loss of faith in lawyers rather than impecuniosity or other exceptional circumstance. There is no evidence Mr Sinanovic cannot retain legal representation. The seriousness of the allegations in the case heightens the importance of professional legal representation. Exceptional circumstances justifying lay representation are not demonstrated.

Court Disposition

Application for leave for lay representation dismissed; costs ordered against Plaintiff; matter stood over.

Orders

  • The application for leave for Ms Maria Sinanaj to represent the Plaintiff is dismissed.
  • The Plaintiff pay the Defendants costs of the Notice of Motion dated 11 October 2024 and the oral application for leave for the Plaintiff to appear by a lay advocate, which costs include the costs of 22 October 2024 and 21 February 2025.