Glew v Frank Jasper Pty Ltd

[2010] WASCA 87

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Appeal
2. › Grounds of appeal
3. › Compliance with rules
4. › Whether grounds have reasonable prospect of succeeding
5. › Self-represented litigant
6. › Allowances for non-compliance
7. › Supreme Court (Court of Appeal) Rules 2005 (WA), r 43(2)(g)(i), r 32(4)
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Self-represented litigants
3. › Obligations of court
4. › Allowances for inadequate expression
5. › Limits on allowances
6. › Fairness to other party
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Corporations as litigants
3. › Requirement for legal representation
4. › Whether corporation may be represented by director who is not a solicitor
5. › Rules of the Supreme Court 1971 (WA), O 4 r 3(2)
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Pleadings
3. › Allegations of fraud and dishonesty
4. › Requirement for proper factual basis and precise particulars

Quick Take

While due allowance must be made for self-represented litigants, including alertness to arguable cases lurking beneath inadequately expressed material, the allowances are necessarily limited both as a matter of fairness to the other party and because acceptable grounds of appeal are fundamental to the appellate function. Unparticularised allegations of judicial fraud or conspiracy will be struck out as improper.