Mallegowda v Transport Secretary (No 3) [2024] NSWIRComm 1054
The applicant was required to adduce evidence satisfying UCPR 7.18(5), including evidence that the proposed tutor consented to appointment and had no adverse interest, but failed to do so; the notice of motion was therefore dismissed.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 29 August 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Victimisation Proceedings; Notice of Motion Seeking Appointment of a Tutor / Procedural Ruling on Notice of Motion Filed 28 August 2024
- Outcome
- Notice of motion filed on 28 August 2024 by the applicant is dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- ['industrial Relations Commission Procedure and Powers' 'victimisation Proceedings' 'self Represented Applicant' 'appointment of Tutor' 'evidentiary Requirements Under UCPR 7.18(5)(b)']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Victimisation Proceedings; Notice of Motion Seeking Appointment of a Tutor / Procedural Ruling on Notice of Motion Filed 28 August 2024
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the Commission should appoint a tutor/legal practitioner for the applicant under UCPR 7.18.' 'Whether the applicant provided the evidence required by UCPR 7.18(5), including evidence that the proposed tutor consents to appointment and has no adverse interest.']
Ratio Decidendi
The applicant was required to adduce evidence satisfying UCPR 7.18(5), including evidence that the proposed tutor consented to appointment and had no adverse interest, but failed to do so; the notice of motion was therefore dismissed.
Court Disposition
Notice of motion filed on 28 August 2024 by the applicant is dismissed.
Orders
- ['Notice of motion filed on 28 August 2024 by the applicant is dismissed.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment