Morwood, I.D. v Chemdata Pty Ltd

Case [1995] FCA 220


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )
  )
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY )    No.  NG 731   of  1994
  )
GENERAL DIVISION                 )

BETWEEN:IAN DAVID MORWOOD & ANOR

Applicant

AND:CHEMDATA PTY LIMITED & ORS

Respondent

24 MARCH 1995

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
LOCKHART J.
     This is a case in which Mr Morwood, the first applicant, had initially sought to represent himself and the company, the second applicant, of which he is a director and shareholder. 

At my suggestion on the last occasion, the matter was adjourned so that steps might be taken through the Registry for the New South Wales Bar Association and the Law Society of New South Wales possibly to make arrangements to give certain advice with respect to pleadings and affidavits and general conduct of the matter, though not appear nor act for the applicants.  

Both bodies have assisted and the result is that counsel has appeared today as amicus curiae, as have their instructing solicitors for the applicants or at least Mr Morgan, and they have indicated they propose to assist in the preparation of a statement of claim.  I think the course that has been taken by the professional bodies and counsel and solicitors is very commendable and I propose to adjourn the matter to 13 April next. 

On the question of costs, this is the fourth occasion the matter has been in for directions and the respondents seek an order for costs of the day.  I understand why that application is made but in view of the fact that the adjournment was directed to a large extent by the Court to assist the applicants, the respondents and the Court to have legal minds preparing the real issues in the case on behalf of the applicants, I think in the circumstances the Court should order that costs of today be reserved and similarly with respect to the previous occasions when the matter has been in the list for mention.  I make that order.

I certify that this and the preceding one (1) pages are a true copy of the reasons for judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Lockhart.

Associate
             Dated:   24 March 1995

Counsel for the Applicants   :        J. L. B. Allsop
(appearing amicus curiae)    :        P. R. Whitford

Solicitors for the Applicants     :        Blake Dawson Waldron
(appearing amicus curiae)    :

Counsel for the Respondents  :        M. R. Ellicott
  L. Dunlop

Solicitors for the Respondents:      Allen Allen & Hemsley

Date of Hearing             :        24 March 19945

Date of Judgment            :        24 March 1995

Details
AGLC
Morwood, I.D. v Chemdata Pty Ltd [1995] FCA 220
Case
[1995] FCA 220
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Federal Court of Australia, the case of Morwood, I.D. v Chemdata Pty Ltd was heard. The applicants, Mr. Ian David Morwood and a company of which he is a director and shareholder, sought to represent themselves in the case. However, the matter was adjourned to allow for legal advice to be provided to the applicants by the New South Wales Bar Association and the Law Society of New South Wales. This assistance was provided through counsel appearing as amicus curiae and their instructing solicitors.

The legal issues in this case involved the applicants' initial representation of themselves and the need for legal advice in preparing a statement of claim. The court considered the role of the professional bodies and counsel in assisting the applicants and decided to adjourn the matter to allow for further preparation. Additionally, the court addressed the issue of costs, reserving costs for the day and previous occasions when the matter had been in the list for mention, given the assistance provided by the professional bodies and counsel.

The court commended the professional bodies and counsel for their commendable course of action in assisting the applicants. The matter was adjourned to 13 April for further preparation. The court also made an order reserving costs for the day and previous occasions, given the assistance provided by the professional bodies and counsel.

No further orders were made in the judgment.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.