Land and Environment Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Lane Cove Council v Ross (No 7) [2013] NSWLEC 76 Hearing dates: 28 May 2013 Decision date: 28 May 2013 Jurisdiction: Class 4 Before: Pepper J Decision: Application to adjourn proceedings refused. Catchwords: PROCEDURE: application to adjourn proceedings on the grounds of a medical condition and lack of representation - no evidence demonstrating condition - application refused. Cases Cited: Jeray v Blue Mountains City Council [2011] NSWLEC 218 Palerang Council v Banfield [2012] NSWLEC 85 Category: Interlocutory applications Parties: Lane Cove Council (Applicant) Mr Raymond Ross (Respondent) Representation: Mr N Eastman (Applicant) Mr R Ross (in person) (Respondent) Pikes & Verekers Lawyers (Applicant) N/A (Respondent) File Number(s): 40628 of 2012 Ex Tempore Judgment Mr Ross Makes a Second Application for an Adjournment 1This is an application made by Mr Ross for a further adjournment of these proceedings. It is made in circumstances where yesterday, Mr Ross made an application for an adjournment, which is presently part-heard, while the Court deals with a recusal application, in which the Court is also part-heard. 2The grounds upon which Mr Ross seeks this adjournment are twofold: (a) first, because he is unrepresented; and (b) second, because he has a medical condition, namely, a migraine. 3With respect to the first reason, the mere fact that Mr Ross is unrepresented does not, of itself, warrant the adjournment of the proceedings, these being, in particular, civil proceedings, for which Mr Ross has had considerable notice and time to prepare. 4As to the second reason, I refer to the decision of Jeray v Blue Mountains City Council [2011] NSWLEC 218 per Moore AJ (at [9]-[11]), where Mr Jeray made a similar application. The application was rejected by the Court because of the inadequacy of the medical evidence in support of the application (see also the decision of the Court in Palerang Council v Banfield [2012] NSWLEC 85 per Lloyd AJ at [10]-[12]). 5In the present case, no evidence whatsoever has been offered by Mr Ross to demonstrate that he has a medical condition warranting an adjournment. Orders 6In these circumstances, I reject the application. ********** DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated. Decision last updated: 31 May 2013