King & Anor v Greenwood (No.2) [2022] NSWDC 188

King & Anor v Greenwood (No.2) [2022] NSWDC 188

The interests of the administration of justice required referral of both the plaintiffs and the defendant to the registrar for possible Pro Bono Panel assistance because the contempt referral application was penal and complex, the parties were self-represented and personally antagonistic, and referral of only the defendant could create an imbalance. Any previous referral did not prevent a further referral because the penal nature, complexity, and administration of justice considerations constituted special reasons.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedural Ruling in Defamation Proceedings / Application for Pro Bono Legal Assistance Before Hearing of the Plaintiffs' Application That the Defendant Be Referred to the Prothonotary for Contempt
Outcome
Both plaintiffs and the defendant were referred to the registrar for referral to the Pro Bono Panel; the contempt application hearing was stood over; costs were reserved.
Legal Topics
['self Represented Litigants' 'referral to Pro Bono Panel' 'ucpr R 7.36' 'breach of Interlocutory Injunction' 'case Management']
['practice and Procedure' 'defamation' 'contempt of Court'] ['self Represented Litigants' 'referral to Pro Bono Panel' 'ucpr R 7.36' 'breach of Interlocutory Injunction' 'case Management']

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

Civil Procedural Ruling in Defamation Proceedings / Application for Pro Bono Legal Assistance Before Hearing of the Plaintiffs' Application That the Defendant Be Referred to the Prothonotary for Contempt

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendant should be referred to the registrar for referral to the Pro Bono Panel for legal assistance in relation to the contempt referral application.' 'Whether the plaintiffs should also be referred for pro bono assistance to avoid imbalance in representation.' 'Whether a previous pro bono referral prevented a further referral absent special reasons.']

Ratio Decidendi

The interests of the administration of justice required referral of both the plaintiffs and the defendant to the registrar for possible Pro Bono Panel assistance because the contempt referral application was penal and complex, the parties were self-represented and personally antagonistic, and referral of only the defendant could create an imbalance. Any previous referral did not prevent a further referral because the penal nature, complexity, and administration of justice considerations constituted special reasons.

Court Disposition

Both plaintiffs and the defendant were referred to the registrar for referral to the Pro Bono Panel; the contempt application hearing was stood over; costs were reserved.

Orders

  • ["Pursuant to UCPR r 7.36 each of the plaintiffs and the defendant are referred to the registrar for referral to the Pro Bono panel for legal assistance for the conduct of the plaintiffs' application that the defendant be referred to the Prothonotary for contempt." 'Proceedings stood over to 4 August 2022 for...