Mahaffy v Darren E Eather t/as Bellevue Pastoral Company [2012] NSWSC 936

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Mahaffy v Darren E Eather t/as Bellevue Pastoral Company [2012] NSWSC 936 Hearing dates: 31/07/2012 Decision date: 31 July 2012 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Garling J Decision: 1. Order that the hearing date of 3/8/12 be vacated. 2. Order the plaintiff to pay costs of the defendant thrown away by vacation of the hearing date. 4. Order that the plaintiff's subpoena of 9/7/12 to the defendant be set aside. Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROEDURE - vacation of hearing date - appeal from Local Court - plaintiff self-represented - application by plaintiff to vacate hearing date in circumstances where firstly documents have not been produced and secondly the plaintiff has had insufficient time to prepare due to his partner's acute illness - first ground fails, not an exceptional case in which it is necessary to receive additional evidence which was not before the Local Court, subpoena for documents set aside - second ground succeeds - interests of justice - hearing date vacated Category: Interlocutory applications Parties: Peter John Mahaffy (P) Darren E Eather t/as Bellevue Pastoral Company (D) Representation: Counsel: P Mahaffy (P) T Gordon (D) File Number(s): 2009/297280

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT 1This is an application by Peter John Mahaffy, the plaintiff in proceedings commenced in 2009, for the vacation of a hearing date, presently fixed on 3 August 2012. 2The proceedings concern a decision made by the Local Court on 29 October 2009, in respect of a civil claim brought by Mr Mahaffy against Mr Darren Eather, who together with other partners traded as the Bellevue Pastoral Company. It seems that Connell LCM rejected the claim by Mr Mahaffy, which was in the nature of a claim for the non-payment of work done and services said to have been provided by Mr Mahaffy to the Bellevue Pastoral Company. 3Although the proceedings in the Court were commenced in 2009, they were not fixed for hearing until 23 April 2012. The basis of the application for an adjournment is principally two-fold.