Bianca Kabel appeared for the Respondents, instructed by Clayton Utz Lawyers.
The judgment concerned an application for an adjournment arising in relation to interlocutory applications made by the applicant. The central issue was whether the applicant’s application for leave to appear remotely should be adjourned in circumstances where the applicant, a self-represented litigant residing in New Zealand, claimed he was unable to appear due to stress, medical concerns, and the absence of legal representation.
The Court held that the application for an adjournment should be granted. Although the applicant had not substantiated the grounds for adjournment and the request was inconsistent with the overarching purpose of the civil practice and procedure provisions under ss 37M and 37N of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) (‘The Act’), the Court considered that, given the applicant’s status as a litigant in person and his asserted psychological difficulties, and the requirement pursuant to s 37M(1)(a) of The Act to facilitate the just resolution of disputes according to law, it was appropriate to allow a further opportunity to pursue a recusal application. The hearing of the recusal application was therefore adjourned to 9 April 2026.
The judgment can be read by clicking here
