Norman v Wall [2020] NSWSC 129

Norman v Wall [2020] NSWSC 129

The Court referred Ms Norman for pro bono assistance because the proceedings were complex, she and Mr Berry had not had focused legal assistance, efforts to obtain assistance outside the Pro Bono Scheme had not succeeded, Mr Berry had already been accepted by the Pro Bono Scheme, and special reasons justified a further referral despite Ms Norman's recent pro bono assistance in defamation proceedings.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure Ruling in Common Law Jurisdiction / Application by the Plaintiffs to File a Second Amended Statement of Claim and Request for Referral for Pro Bono Assistance
Outcome
Ms Norman was referred for pro bono assistance under Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 7.36.
Legal Topics
['unrepresented Litigants' 'pro Bono Referral' 'amended Statement of Claim' 'uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (nsw) R 7.36']
['civil Procedure'] ['unrepresented Litigants' 'pro Bono Referral' 'amended Statement of Claim' 'uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (nsw) R 7.36']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Civil Procedure Ruling in Common Law Jurisdiction / Application by the Plaintiffs to File a Second Amended Statement of Claim and Request for Referral for Pro Bono Assistance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Ms Norman should be referred for pro bono assistance under Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 7.36.' "Whether the interests of the administration of justice justified a pro bono referral in light of the complexity of the proceedings, attempts to obtain legal assistance, and Ms Norman's previous pro bono referral within three years."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Court referred Ms Norman for pro bono assistance because the proceedings were complex, she and Mr Berry had not had focused legal assistance, efforts to obtain assistance outside the Pro Bono Scheme had not succeeded, Mr Berry had already been accepted by the Pro Bono Scheme, and special reasons justified a further referral despite Ms Norman's recent pro bono assistance in defamation proceedings.

Court Disposition

Ms Norman was referred for pro bono assistance under Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 7.36.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to Uniform Civil Procedure Rule 7.36, Ms Norman, the first plaintiff, is referred for Pro Bono Assistance for advice and preparation of a further Amended Statement of Claim.' 'The referral is limited to advising the named plaintiffs on the viability of the cause of action in tort, breach of fiduciary duty...