NSW Caselaw
Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Kostov v State of New South Wales (No 3) [2019] NSWCA 189 Hearing dates: 29 July 2019 Date of orders: 29 July 2019 Decision date: 29 July 2019 Before: Bell P Decision: 1. Grant leave to the respondents to file in court an amended notice of motion dated 26 July 2019.
2. Grant leave to file in court the affidavit of John Kenneth McDonnell affirmed 26 July 2019 and the affidavit of Amanda Rose Sapienza sworn 26 July 2019.
3. Grant leave to file in court a set of submissions entitled "Attorney General's submissions concerning r 33.13 application".
4. Order that filed copies of those documents be served on Ms Kostov by email at xxx by the solicitors for the respondents from the Crown Solicitor's Office general email account and that filed copies also be sent to her by email by the Registry.
5. Direct that Ms Kostov file any written submissions and any evidence in answer to the Attorney General's submissions concerning the r 33.13 application by 5.00pm on 9 August 2019. Any evidence is to be in the form of an affidavit filed in the Registry and written submissions are to be also filed in the Registry by that time.
6. Direct that any submissions or evidence in reply be filed by the respondents by 5.00pm on 14 August 2019 and the matter will be resolved by reference to the written submissions and evidence.
7. Direct that Ms Kostov file a notice of change of address of service pursuant to r 4.6 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) by 4.00pm on 9 August 2019.
8. Stand the matter over to 9.30am on Thursday 29 August 2019. Catchwords: CIVIL PROCEDURE – service – where email addresses of respondent's solicitors had been blocked by applicant – where applicant's physical address for service no longer current Legislation Cited: Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) rr 4.5, 4.6, 23.4 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Adriana Kostov (Appellant) State of New South Wales (First Respondent) Attorney General for New South Wales (Second Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Appellant self-represented and by telephone D Birch (First and Second Respondents)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate