Odlum v Friend [2022] NSWSC 252
The plaintiff did not establish special reasons for a further referral for pro bono assistance under r 7.36(2A) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), and the only basis for vacating the hearing date was connected to the pro bono referral, which was refused; accordingly, the motion was dismissed and costs ordered against the plaintiff.
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Judith Anne Odlum; First Defendant: Stephen Friend trading as Friend and Co Lawyers; Second Defendant: Andrew J Paterson
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 11 March 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Application / Notice of Motion for Referral to Pro Bono Panel and Adjournment
- Outcome
- notice of motion dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Referral to Pro Bono Panel, Vacating Hearing Date
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Judith Anne Odlum
Plaintiff
Stephen Friend trading as Friend and Co Lawyers
First Defendant
Andrew J Paterson
Second Defendant
Procedural Posture
Application / Notice of Motion for Referral to Pro Bono Panel and Adjournment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether special reasons for referral to pro bono panel for legal assistance are established
- 2 Whether hearing date should be vacated
Ratio Decidendi
The plaintiff did not establish special reasons for a further referral for pro bono assistance under r 7.36(2A) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), and the only basis for vacating the hearing date was connected to the pro bono referral, which was refused; accordingly, the motion was dismissed and costs ordered against the plaintiff.
Court Disposition
notice of motion dismissed
Orders
- The plaintiff's notice of motion is dismissed
- The plaintiff to pay the defendants' costs of the notice of motion
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment