Riva NSW Pty Ltd v Mark a Fraser and Christopher P Clancy t/as Fraser Clancy Lawyers

Riva NSW Pty Ltd (the applicant) sought judicial review of certain directions made by a primary judge in the District Court. The dispute concerned directions issued by the primary judge regarding non-parties to a notice of motion, including legal representatives, which required their conduct to be brought to the attention of regulatory, prosecutorial, and disciplinary authorities. The applicant argued that these directions were invalid due to a denial of procedural fairness.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the primary judge erred in making directions that required the conduct of legal representatives to be brought to the attention of various authorities without affording those representatives an opportunity to be heard. The Court was asked to determine if this failure constituted a denial of procedural fairness, rendering the directions invalid.

The Court of Appeal found that the primary judge's directions, specifically those in paragraph [124] subparagraphs (a), (b), (c) and (h) of the District Court judgment of 24 July 2019, were made without affording procedural fairness to the persons referred to in them. The Court reasoned that it is a fundamental principle of natural justice that a person should not be subject to adverse findings or directions without being given an opportunity to respond. Consequently, the Court declared these specific directions to be invalid.

The Court of Appeal ordered that the directions made by paragraph [124] subparagraphs (a), (b), (c) and (h) of the District Court judgment of 24 July 2019 be declared invalid. The summons for judicial review was otherwise dismissed. The first applicant was ordered to pay the first respondents’ costs of the summons, with no order as to the costs of the second and third applicants.