Chris (Krste) Saravinovski v George Saravinovski

The parties to the case were Chris (Krste) Saravinovski and George Saravinovski. The dispute centred on the issue of whether the interrogatories were necessary at the time the order for them was sought. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The applicant sought an order that the defendant's answers to interrogatories be taken as admitted. The defendant opposed the application on the grounds that the interrogatories were not necessary at the time the order for them was sought, as required by UCPR Pt 22, Rule 22.1(4).

The court had to decide whether the interrogatories were necessary at the time the order for them was sought. The court noted that there was no issue of principle in the case and that the matter was one of degree. The court held that the interrogatories were not necessary at the time the order for them was sought because the applicant had failed to establish that the interrogatories were necessary to dispose of the real issue in the proceeding. The court found that the applicant had not shown that the interrogatories were necessary to dispose of the real issue in the proceeding, which was whether the defendant had made any contributions to the property in question.

The court dismissed the application and made no order as to costs. The court held that the interrogatories were not necessary at the time the order for them was sought, and that the applicant had failed to establish that the interrogatories were necessary to dispose of the real issue in the proceeding. The court found that the applicant had not shown that the interrogatories were necessary to dispose of the real issue in the proceeding, which was whether the defendant had made any contributions to the property in question.