The Owners – Strata Plan No 38065 v Xi Zhang; Yan Shi; Bertram Residential Pty Ltd atf the Bertram Residential Trust; Bertram Commercial Pty Ltd atf the Bertram Commercial Trust (No 2) [2026] NSWLEC 90 — Application To Vacate Final Hearing — Barrister AI
The Owners – Strata Plan No 38065 v Xi Zhang; Yan Shi; Bertram Residential Pty Ltd atf the Bertram Residential Trust; Bertram Commercial Pty Ltd atf the Bertram Commercial Trust (No 2)
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE — application to vacate final hearing — discretionary considerations — overriding purposes of case management orders — solicitor for First and Second Respondents wishing to go on honeymoon — review of Registrar’s decision — no error of law by Registrar — application refused
Quick Take
1On review of a Registrar's discretionary decision on practice or procedure under UCPR r 49.19, the applicant must normally demonstrate at least an error of law, a House v The King error, a material change of circumstances, or fresh evidence satisfying strict requirements, per Tomko v Palasty (No 2).
2A solicitor's pre-arranged personal travel (here, a honeymoon) that was not disclosed to the Registrar at the directions hearing when the hearing date was fixed does not, without more, warrant vacating a final hearing date, particularly where the travel could be deferred.
3The overriding purpose provisions in ss 56, 58 and 59 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) weigh against vacating a hearing where the opposing parties would suffer prejudice from delay and the Court's Practice Note contemplates early listing of strata scheme development proceedings.
