Krnjic v Bunnings Group Ltd (No.2)

The applicant, Krnjic, brought proceedings against the respondent, Bunnings Group Ltd. Bunnings sought orders to stay the proceeding pending the appointment of a litigation guardian for Krnjic, alleging Krnjic suffered from mental incapacity. The Federal Circuit Court of Australia heard the application.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether to grant Bunnings' application for a stay of proceedings to allow for the appointment of a litigation guardian for Krnjic, given the alleged mental incapacity of the applicant. This required the Court to consider the adequacy of the evidence presented by Bunnings to support its contention of Krnjic's incapacity and the necessity of appointing a guardian.

His Honour Judge Wilson dismissed Bunnings' application, finding it premature and disproportionate. The Court noted that no formal application for the appointment of a litigation guardian had been made by Krnjic. The application by Bunnings was made *ore tenus* and relied on a note from Krnjic's solicitor and a letter from a consultant psychiatrist. The Court found this material insufficient to support the legal contentions advanced by Bunnings, as it lacked a medically and legally supportable psychiatric evaluation and detailed evidence of Krnjic's mental state. The psychiatrist's letter, in particular, failed to dissect the elements required by rule 11.08 of the Federal Circuit Court Rules concerning the appointment of a litigation guardian. The Court conducted an extensive review of relevant authorities in reaching its decision.