Majak v Rose (No 6)

In *Majak v Rose (No 6)*, the applicant sought to have a hearing date vacated. The specific nature of the underlying dispute between the parties is not detailed in the provided text, but the application concerned the scheduling of proceedings before Payne JA.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the applicant had established sufficient grounds to justify vacating the already fixed hearing date. This required an assessment of the reasons provided by the applicant for seeking the adjournment and whether those reasons met the legal threshold for such an order.

Payne JA dismissed the applicant's notice of motion. While the precise reasoning is not elaborated upon in the provided text, the dismissal indicates that the court was not satisfied that the grounds presented by the applicant warranted the disruption of the scheduled hearing. The court's decision implies that the applicant failed to demonstrate a compelling reason to vacate the date.