Martincic v Marusco

[2016] WASCA 133

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Adjournment of trial
3. › Refusal to vacate trial dates
4. › Expedited trial
5. › Whether exercise of discretion unreasonable
6. › Whether party given sufficient opportunity to prepare
7. › Rules of the Supreme Court 1971 (WA), O 34 r 4
1. Appeal
2. › Leave to appeal
3. › Interlocutory orders
4. › Refusal to adjourn trial
5. › Whether decision attended by sufficient doubt
6. › Whether substantial injustice
7. › Supreme Court Act 1935 (WA), s 60(1)(f)
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Case management
3. › Programming orders
4. › Non-compliance by party
5. › Obligations of parties to diligently prepare for trial
6. › Rules of the Supreme Court 1971 (WA), O 1 r 4A, O 1 r 4B

Quick Take

A party who fails to utilise available formal and informal mechanisms for obtaining documents, fails to comply with programming orders, and fails to adduce direct evidence of a defence cannot complain of being denied a sufficient opportunity to prepare when an adjournment of an imminent trial is refused. The availability of an appeal from final orders on the ground of miscarriage of justice may weigh against granting leave to appeal an interlocutory adjournment refusal.