Pritchard v Fryer [2018] NSWSC 160

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Pritchard v Fryer [2018] NSWSC 160 Hearing dates: 1 February 2018 Decision date: 22 February 2018 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Fullerton J Decision: 1. The Summons is dismissed. 2. The Notice of Motion is dismissed. 3. The plaintiff is to pay the defendant's costs. Catchwords: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – judicial review - appeal from Local Court - whether Local Court denied the plaintiff procedural fairness – dismissal of Statement of Claim in the absence of the plaintiff. Legislation Cited: Local Court Act 2007 (NSW) Cases Cited: He v Hecker [2013] NSWSC 1219 Escobar v Spindaleri (1986) 7 NSWLR 51 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Andrew Pritchard (Plaintiff) Gregory Fryer (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: In person (Plaintiff) P Sharrock (Defendant)

Solicitors: In person (Plaintiff) In person (Defendant) File Number(s): 2017/200426 Decision under appeal Court or tribunal: Local Court of New South Wales Date of Decision: 6 June 2017 Before: Keogh LCM File Number(s): 2016/343068

Judgment 1. HER HONOUR: By Summons filed on 3 July 2017, Andrew Ronald Pritchard, the plaintiff, seeks an order that the decision of Keogh LCM of 6 June 2017 dismissing the plaintiff's Statement of Claim dated 16 November 2016 be set aside. He also seeks an order that her Honour's order that he pay the defendant's costs be set aside. 2. An appeal to this Court against a judgment of the Local Court is as of right, but only on a question of law (Local Court Act 2007 (NSW) s 39(1)). The plaintiff contends that in dismissing the Statement of Claim he was denied procedural fairness. 3. It is trite to observe that the requirements of procedural fairness apply to proceedings in the Local Court. In respect of an appeal from a Magistrate to this Court, Harrison AsJ in He v Hecker [2013] NSWSC 1219 at [28], observed: The contents of the requirements of natural justice or procedural fairness are not fixed but they involve a duty to act judicially, deal with the matter for decision without bias, give each party the opportunity of adequately presenting its case, observe the procedural and other rules provided for in the relevant statute and come to its decision with that sense of responsibility that is the necessary accompaniment of the duty to do justice. See Wakim v Mathiew Pty Ltd t/as Dove Migration Services [2002] NSWSC 405. 1. A denial of procedural fairness is an error of law: Escobar v Spindaleri (1986) 7 NSWLR 51. 2. The Summons identifies three grounds by reason of which the plaintiff claims he was denied procedural fairness. Those grounds are set out at [23] below. 3. At the hearing the plaintiff also claimed that he was ill on 6 June 2017 and did not attend the Court on that day for that reason as a further basis for the relief sought. 4. The question whether the plaintiff's claim of ill-health or any of the grounds identified in the Summons as constituting a denial of procedural fairness are supported by the evidence or are otherwise available as grounding the relief sought will be considered later in this judgment. 5. On 17 January 2018 the plaintiff filed a Notice of Motion in these proceedings seeking, inter alia, that the Notice of Motion be heard in substitution for the hearing of the Summons. The duty judge listed the Notice of Motion for hearing together with the Summons on 1 February 2018; being the day appointed for the hearing of the Summons. 6. For reasons which will become apparent, the multiplicity of orders sought by the Notice of Motion do not arise. 7. Both before this Court and in the Local Court the plaintiff has appeared as a litigant in person. On each occasion the defendant was represented by Mr Sharrock of counsel.