Zelic v Barisic (No 2) [2018] NSWSC 1380

Zelic v Barisic (No 2) [2018] NSWSC 1380

The parties, and in particular the plaintiff's solicitor, failed to comply with directions to confer regarding agreement on the venue for examination as required by the orders, and cannot abdicate responsibility for such arrangements simply because the application originated from the opposing party; the overriding purpose in civil procedure imposes obligations to meaningfully participate and assist the court.

Parties
Plaintiff: Marijan Zelic; Defendant: Ivanka Barisic
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Directions Hearing
Outcome
Further directions; listing for compliance with orders; possible dispensation if agreement reached
Legal Topics
Examination of Plaintiff, Compliance With Court Orders, Directions Hearings, Overriding Purpose
Civil Procedure Examination of Plaintiff Compliance With Court Orders Directions Hearings Overriding Purpose

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marijan Zelic

Plaintiff

Ivanka Barisic

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Directions Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's solicitor complied with court directions to confer regarding the place for examination under UCPR r 24.3
  2. 2 Whether the court should require a non-party facility manager to give evidence about refusal to permit examination at their facility
  3. 3 Parties' obligations to assist the court further the overriding purpose under Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), s 56

Ratio Decidendi

The parties, and in particular the plaintiff's solicitor, failed to comply with directions to confer regarding agreement on the venue for examination as required by the orders, and cannot abdicate responsibility for such arrangements simply because the application originated from the opposing party; the overriding purpose in civil procedure imposes obligations to meaningfully participate and assist the court.

Court Disposition

Further directions; listing for compliance with orders; possible dispensation if agreement reached

Orders

  • List the matter before Campbell J at 9:15 am on Thursday, 30 August 2018.
  • Direct Mr Constantine Green, solicitor for the plaintiff, to appear in person on that day to explain compliance with court directions regarding agreement on the place of examination.