Fazio v McNALLY

[2014] WASCA 79

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Appeals
3. › Appeal from District Court dismissing appeal from Magistrates Court
4. › Whether grounds of appeal have reasonable prospect of success
5. › Supreme Court (Court of Appeal) Rules 2005 (WA), r 43(2)(g)(i)
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Procedural fairness
3. › Proceeding in absence of party
4. › Whether court entitled to proceed where party failed to attend and failed to comply with programming orders
5. › Whether late notification of ill-health without medical evidence required adjournment
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Apprehended bias
3. › Whether fair-minded lay observer might reasonably apprehend judge might not bring impartial mind
4. › Whether judge's involvement in other matters involving same party gave rise to apprehension of bias
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Costs
3. › Indemnity costs
4. › Whether unreasonable conduct warranted departure from party-party costs
5. › Wilful non-compliance with programming orders
6. › Appeal entirely lacking in merit

Quick Take

A court may proceed in the absence of a party who has wilfully failed to comply with programming orders and who provides no medical evidence or express adjournment request on the morning of a hearing. The public interest in the efficient disposition of court business is a relevant factor in deciding whether to adjourn. Indemnity costs may be ordered where a party has without explanation failed to comply with programming orders and the appeal is entirely lacking in merit.