Lawrence v Sammut (No. 2) [2022] NSWSC 390

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Lawrence v Sammut (No. 2) [2022] NSWSC 390 Hearing dates: On the papers Date of orders: 05 April 2022 Decision date: 05 April 2022 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Lonergan J Decision: (1) The application by the plaintiff for leave to issue subpoenas to Karen McLean and Associates, MWL Financial Group, and Harrison and Gill Chartered Accountants is refused. (2) The plaintiff is to pay the defendant's costs of the application. Catchwords: CIVIL PROCEDURE – unrepresented litigant – leave to issue subpoenas – documents sought irrelevant to remaining issues in proceedings – no point of principle Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 NSW Legal Professional Uniform Law Application Act 2014 (NSW) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) Cases Cited: Lawrence v Sammut [2022] NSWSC 344 Secretary of the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment v Blacktown City Council [2021] NSWCA 145 Category: Procedural rulings Parties: Wayne James Lawrence (Plaintiff) Alice Alexandria Sammut (First Defendant) Paul William Ciantar (Second Defendant) Representation: Counsel: JC McDonald (Defendants)

Solicitors: Self-represented (Plaintiff) McLean & Associates (Defendants) File Number(s): 2021/57931 Publication restriction: Nil

Judgment 1. These proceedings concern an appeal under s 89 of the Legal Professional Uniform Law Application Act 2014 (NSW) from a determination of a Costs Review PaneI in February 2021. 2. The background and relevant history to the proceedings is set out in [1] to [14] of Lawrence v Sammut [2022] NSWSC 344. That judgment concerned the setting aside of notices to produce issued by the plaintiff, and should be read together with this judgment. 3. The problems with the notices to produce the subject of that judgment are similar to the problems that apply to the subpoenas now sought to be issued, namely, that the material sought is irrelevant to the issues that remain live before the Court in these proceedings. Those issues are confined to argument regarding the action the Court should take in response to a referee's report on costs. 4. By notice of motion filed 18 March 2022, the plaintiff seeks leave to issue subpoenas to the defendant's solicitor Karen McLean and Associates, the MWL Financial Group, and Harrison and Gill Chartered Accountants. 5. Because he does not have a solicitor acting for him, the plaintiff requires the Court's leave to issue the subpoenas: Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), (UCPR) r 7.3. 6. For the reasons that follow, leave is refused.