A court cannot proceed in a party's absence on the basis that the party does not intend to participate further unless that conclusion is reasonably open on the evidence; equivocal statements by a party who is simultaneously asserting a desire to have bias determined first and denying withdrawal do not support such a finding. A court must warn a party that the hearing will proceed in their absence before doing so. Refusal of leave to amend pleadings cannot be based solely on case management considerations where the real issue in controversy is already being litigated by both parties and no prejudice would result from the amendment.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.
1 of the 1 citing case carries a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.