STUDER v BOETTCHER [1993] NSWCA 258

STUDER v BOETTCHER

SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL

KIRBY P, PRIESTLEY and CRIPPS JJ 22 February 1993, 22 February 1993

[1993] NSWCA 258

CONTRACTS — unjust contracts — pleading — pleading struck out as disclosing no cause of action — whether pleaded or adequately pleaded Contracts Review Act to overcome settlement agreement executed by the claimant — belated summons for leave to appeal — no ground for leave — complex proceedings where claimant denied legal aid and appearing without legal representation — held:

LEGAL PRACTITIONERS — pro bono advice — complex litigation involving litigant appearing without legal representatives — observations by Priestley JA (Kirby P agreeing) upon the desirability of possible consideration of the case by a legal practitioner on a pro bono basis.

(1) The summons for leave to appeal should be dismissed as disclosing no error on the part of the judges whose orders were appealed from. Beneficial Finance Corporation Ltd v Karavas and Ors (1991) 23 NSWLR 256 (CA), 264 referred to; (2) Observations by Priestley JA (Kirby P agreeing) about the desirability of a review of the case and advice to the claimant by a legal practitioner on a pro bono basis. Contracts Review Act 1980.

Kirby P Before the Court is a summons for leave to appeal and a notice of motion which is joined to the summons. The summons seeks leave to appeal from orders which were made in the Equity Division of the Supreme Court in November and December 1992 respectively by Waddell CJ in Eq and by Young J. The motion seeks an extension of time to cure the time default in filing the summons and an order for the preservation of property about which questions may arise in the proceedings. The motion fails if the summons fails, as I believe it does.

The difficulties which stand in the way of the successful prosecution of an appeal against the orders made by Waddell CJ in Eq and Young J have been sufficiently elaborated in the exchanges between the Court and Mrs Studer, who appeared with the claimant, and Mr Bracey, who by leave of the Court was allowed to assist and who has also given a great deal of assistance and to the Court.