Mohareb v Saratoga Marine Pty Ltd

Mohareb (the applicant) sought leave to appeal against a decision of the primary court. Saratoga Marine Pty Ltd was the respondent. The dispute concerned an application for leave to appeal where the applicant's submissions were considered oppressive and in flagrant breach of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW). The Court of Appeal of New South Wales was required to determine whether to grant leave to appeal.

The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the applicant's submissions met the threshold for granting leave to appeal, particularly in light of their non-compliance with procedural rules, and whether the application raised any issue of principle, question of public importance, or a reasonably clear injustice. The court also considered the implications of the applicant being a litigant in person.

Bell P and Emmett AJA held that there were no special rules or treatment for litigants in person, and that all litigants, including those unrepresented, must adhere to the length, content, and form requirements for written submissions as set out in the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW). The court found that the applicant's submissions were oppressive and in flagrant breach of these rules, and that the application for leave to appeal did not raise any issue of principle, question of public importance, or a reasonably clear injustice. Consequently, the court dismissed the notice of motion and the application for leave to appeal, with costs awarded to the respondent.