Hussain v Shahidulalam (No 2) [2017] NSWSC 1639

Hussain v Shahidulalam (No 2) [2017] NSWSC 1639

The court refused the adjournment, finding that the medical evidence did not expressly indicate Mr Hussain could not attend or participate, there was no prognosis regarding a future hearing date, the same arguments and health evidence had previously been considered and rejected, and Mr Hussain had not complied with prior directions to advance his appeal. The absence of legal representation and the pending Legal Aid appointment were insufficient grounds, given substantial time to obtain representation and prior refusal of pro bono referral.

Parties
Plaintiff: Mohammad Munir Hussain; Defendant: Md Shahidulalam
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion for Adjournment in Supreme Court Civil Appeal / Interlocutory Application; Adjournment Sought Prior to Hearing of Appeal
Outcome
Adjournment application refused and notice of motion dismissed.
Legal Topics
Adjournment Application, Procedural Fairness, Self Represented Litigants, Case Management, Non Compliance With Court Orders
Civil Procedure Adjournment Application Procedural Fairness Self Represented Litigants Case Management Non Compliance With Court Orders

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohammad Munir Hussain

Plaintiff

Md Shahidulalam

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Notice of Motion for Adjournment in Supreme Court Civil Appeal / Interlocutory Application; Adjournment Sought Prior to Hearing of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff’s health condition and lack of legal representation warranted an adjournment of the appeal hearing
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff’s non-compliance with previous directions should affect the application

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused the adjournment, finding that the medical evidence did not expressly indicate Mr Hussain could not attend or participate, there was no prognosis regarding a future hearing date, the same arguments and health evidence had previously been considered and rejected, and Mr Hussain had not complied with prior directions to advance his appeal. The absence of legal representation and the pending Legal Aid appointment were insufficient grounds, given substantial time to obtain representation and prior refusal of pro bono referral.

Court Disposition

Adjournment application refused and notice of motion dismissed.

Orders

  • Adjournment application filed 17 November 2017 refused.
  • Notice of motion dismissed.