Benecke v The National Australia Bank Limited

Gloria Constance Benecke, the applicant, sought special leave to appeal from a decision of the National Australia Bank Limited, the respondent, before the High Court of Australia. Ms Benecke, representing herself, requested an adjournment of her application for special leave pending the determination of her application for legal aid.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether to grant Ms Benecke's application for an adjournment. This involved considering the circumstances under which the Court might adjourn proceedings to allow a party to secure legal representation, particularly in light of an ongoing application for legal aid.

The Court, through Brennan J, noted the ordinary rule that applications for special leave are typically presented by counsel. Ms Benecke's request for an adjournment was based on her pending legal aid application. The respondent, represented by counsel, objected to the adjournment, arguing that the mere fact of an application to the Legal Aid Commission was not sufficient grounds for an adjournment. They submitted that an adjournment might be considered if the legal aid application was refused and a review was pending, but that the Court would require evidence satisfying specific statutory requirements to grant such an adjournment. The respondent referred to sections 56 and 57 of the *Legal Aid Commission Act 1979* (NSW) as relevant to the Court's power to adjourn.