Cao v Liu [2013] NSWDC 8

Cao v Liu [2013] NSWDC 8

Leave for lay representation by the defendant's husband is refused; an exceptional order for unqualified representation requires good grounds, which were not demonstrated by the evidence presented, particularly given the complexity of defamation proceedings and the lack of sufficient medical evidence regarding the defendant's incapacity.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Applications / Directions Hearing Prior to Final Hearing
Outcome
Interlocutory orders made; leave for Mr Yu to appear refused; matter stood over for further directions.
Legal Topics
['lay Representation' 'leave to Appear' 'litigants in Person' 'mc Kenzie Friend' 'defamation Pleadings' 'case Management']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['lay Representation' 'leave to Appear' 'litigants in Person' 'mc Kenzie Friend' 'defamation Pleadings' '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

Interlocutory Applications / Directions Hearing Prior to Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the defendant's husband (Mr Yu) should be granted leave to appear on behalf of the defendant as a lay advocate at the final hearing in a defamation case" "Adequacy of particulars in the plaintiff's statement of claim regarding identification, extrinsic facts, and publication"]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave for lay representation by the defendant's husband is refused; an exceptional order for unqualified representation requires good grounds, which were not demonstrated by the evidence presented, particularly given the complexity of defamation proceedings and the lack of sufficient medical evidence regarding the defendant's incapacity.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory orders made; leave for Mr Yu to appear refused; matter stood over for further directions.

Orders

  • ['The plaintiff is to file an amended statement of claim particularising identification, extrinsic facts and persons to whom those facts were known, as well as publication details, within 14 days.' 'The plaintiff is to serve statements (limited to publication) in 14 days.' "Mr George Yu's application to appear for...