A trial judge does not err in refusing to adjourn proceedings for a self-represented litigant to obtain legal representation where no corroborating evidence from proposed lawyers is produced, the matter has been fixed for hearing for a substantial period, and there is prejudice to other parties. Where a party voluntarily leaves the courtroom during trial, having stated an intention to obtain medical evidence but failing to return or provide it, the judge is entitled to treat the party as having abandoned the hearing and to continue the trial in their absence. Adverse interlocutory rulings do not of themselves give rise to apprehended bias, and a judge may peremptorily refuse repeated disqualification applications that are bordering on the vexatious. In the absence of evidence of foreign law, the court presumes foreign law to be the same as local law for the purpose of determining the substantial truth of a defamation imputation.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.