Chel v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited (No 4) [2015] NSWSC 1727

Chel v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited (No 4) [2015] NSWSC 1727

The adjournment was refused because, in all the circumstances, the Court was not persuaded that granting it would be in the interests of justice; the plaintiff's asserted prejudice and possible waste of time did not justify stopping the hearing.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Application for Adjournment / Hearing Pending Determination of Application for Leave to Appeal to Court of Appeal From Interlocutory Decision
Outcome
Application for adjournment refused
Legal Topics
['adjournment of Hearing' 'leave to Appeal' 'stay of Proceedings' 'trial by Judge Alone' 'jury Trial']

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

Application for Adjournment / Hearing Pending Determination of Application for Leave to Appeal to Court of Appeal From Interlocutory Decision

  1. 1 ["Whether the proceedings should be adjourned pending the Court of Appeal's consideration of a stay or leave to appeal from the interlocutory decision that the trial continue by judge alone." 'Whether continuing the hearing would waste time if the Court of Appeal later ordered a jury trial.' 'Whether the plaintiff would suffer prejudice by giving evidence before any rehearing because a transcript could be used in later cross-examination.']

Ratio Decidendi

The adjournment was refused because, in all the circumstances, the Court was not persuaded that granting it would be in the interests of justice; the plaintiff's asserted prejudice and possible waste of time did not justify stopping the hearing.

Court Disposition

Application for adjournment refused

Orders

  • ['Application for adjournment refused']