Rahman v Rahman (No 1)

Rahman v Rahman (No 1) concerned an application for an adjournment made by the husband in proceedings before the Court of Appeal of New South Wales. The husband sought to vacate a proceeding already set down for hearing months in the future, in order to have it heard together with a separate, later-filed proceeding. Both proceedings challenged distinct decisions of the District Court concerning apprehended domestic violence orders made between the husband and his estranged wife. One District Court decision had refused an order sought by the husband against the wife, while the other had granted an order sought by the wife against the husband.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the husband's application for an adjournment, and the consequent vacating of the earlier listed proceeding, should be granted. This required the court to consider whether the two separate proceedings, despite involving the same parties, raised sufficiently interconnected issues or relied on sufficiently overlapping evidence to warrant being heard concurrently, thereby justifying the disruption to the already scheduled hearing.

The Court of Appeal reasoned that while the parties were indeed the same, each proceeding raised distinct legal issues and turned on its own unique set of evidence. The court concluded that there was no compelling reason to consolidate the hearings or to adjourn the already listed proceeding. Accordingly, the notice of motion filed on 19 April 2024 was dismissed, with costs reserved.