Bobolas v Waverley Council

Bobolas and Waverley Council were the parties involved in proceedings before the Court of Appeal of New South Wales concerning the enforcement of orders made under the *Local Government Act 1993* (NSW) and the *Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979* (NSW). The core of the dispute revolved around the validity of these orders, the effectiveness of their service, and allegations of a denial of procedural fairness.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine several key legal issues. These included whether the enforcement orders issued by the Council were invalid, whether proper service of these orders had been effected upon the appellant, and whether the appellant had been denied procedural fairness. Additionally, the Court considered an application for an adjournment, made pursuant to s 57 of the *Legal Aid Commission Act 1979* (NSW), in circumstances where the parties seeking the adjournment did not appear, and whether the primary judge had erred in refusing this application, particularly in relation to a bona fide appeal or intention to appeal a refusal of legal aid. The validity of an affidavit, despite alleged irregularities in its form, was also a point of contention, as was the probative weight of heavily redacted medical certificates submitted as evidence of an inability to attend court.

The Court of Appeal ultimately dismissed the appeal with costs. The reasoning likely involved a consideration of the *Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005* (NSW) and the *Civil Procedure Act 2005* (NSW), which grant courts the power to deal with procedural irregularities, suggesting that any formal defects in the affidavit or service were either cured or did not invalidate the proceedings. The refusal of the adjournment was likely upheld based on the absence of the applicants and the absence of a demonstrated bona fide intention to appeal the legal aid refusal. The probative value of the redacted medical certificates would have been assessed in light of the evidence presented.