Young v Roads and Maritime Services - [2016] NSWCA 291

Court of Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Young v Roads and Maritime Services [2016] NSWCA 291
Hearing dates: 17 October 2016
Date of orders: 17 October 2016
Decision date: 17 October 2016
Before: Beazley ACJ
Decision:
1. Being satisfied that it is in the interests of justice to do so, I refer the applicant, Maureen Mary Young, to the Registrar for referral to a barrister for legal assistance to give advice in relation to the leave granted by this Court in order 1 made 1 September 2016;
2. The notice of motion filed 11 October 2016 is otherwise dismissed.
Catchwords: PRACTICE – pro bono referral – whether referral in interests of justice – where applicant has previously received referral – scope of pro bono referral scheme – whether referral appropriate in relation to special leave application
Legislation Cited: Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW)
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Maureen Mary Young (Applicant)
Roads and Maritime Services (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
In person (Applicant)
N/A (Respondent)
Solicitors:
In person (Applicant)
N/A (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2014/339704
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

Supreme Court

Jurisdiction:

Common Law Division

Citation:

Young v Roads and Maritime Services [2015] NSWSC 918; Young v Roads and Maritime Services (No 2) [2015] NSWSC 1944; Young v Roads and Maritime Services (No 3) [2016] NSWSC 491

Date of Decision:

10 July 2015; 17 December 2015; 22 April 2016

Before:

Hidden J; Button J

File Number(s):

2014/198018; 2015/249441

Judgment

HER HONOUR: The applicant, Maureen Mary Young, by notice of motion filed 11 October 2016 seeks orders for a referral for pro bono assistance under the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) (UCPR), Div 9, Pt 7. By order 2 sought in that notice of motion, Ms Young seeks a referral for legal assistance including in respect of the orders the Court made in her favour on 1 September 2016 whereby leave was granted to her to appeal against orders 5 and 6 of the orders made by Button J on 22 April 2016. In my opinion, it is appropriate under the pro bono referral scheme that a referral be made to counsel to advise in relation to those orders.
Ms Young also seeks a referral for pro bono legal assistance from counsel for advice in relation to the balance of the matters in respect of which leave was not granted. The purpose for seeking that pro bono advice is to assist her in relation to an application she wishes to make to seek special leave to appeal to the High Court.
I reject the application for pro bono assistance from senior counsel regarding a special leave application in the High Court in respect of the grounds of appeal dismissed on 1 September 2016. My reasons for doing so are, first, in my opinion, the pro bono scheme for which the UCPR, Div 9, Pt 7 provides is one which is only applicable in respect of proceedings relevantly in the Supreme Court including the…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Young v Roads and Maritime Services and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2016] NSWCA 291
Decision Date: 17 October 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In *Young v Roads and Maritime Services*, the applicant, Maureen Mary Young, sought legal assistance in relation to leave granted by the Court. The dispute concerned the appropriateness of a pro bono referral under the Court's referral scheme, particularly given the applicant had previously received a referral and the current application related to a special leave application. The matter came before Beazley ACJ.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether it was in the interests of justice to refer the applicant for legal assistance to provide advice concerning the leave previously granted. This required the Court to consider the scope and application of the pro bono referral scheme in the context of the applicant's circumstances and the nature of the legal matter.

Beazley ACJ was satisfied that a referral was in the interests of justice. The Court applied the principles governing its pro bono referral scheme, which allows for the provision of legal assistance where it is deemed appropriate and in the interests of justice. The Court's reasoning led to the conclusion that the applicant should be referred to the Registrar for referral to a barrister for legal assistance to advise on the leave granted.

Consequently, the Court ordered that the applicant be referred to the Registrar for referral to a barrister for legal assistance to give advice in relation to the leave granted. The notice of motion filed on 11 October 2016 was otherwise dismissed.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Being satisfied that it is in the interests of justice to do so, I refer the applicant, Maureen Mary Young, to the Registrar for referral to a barrister for legal assistance to give advice in relation to the leave granted by this Court in order 1 made 1 September 2016;

2. The notice of motion filed 11 October 2016 is otherwise dismissed.

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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	Young v Roads and Maritime Services [2016] NSWCA 291
Hearing dates:	17 October 2016
Date of orders:	17 October 2016
Decision date:	17 October 2016
Before:	Beazley ACJ
Decision:	1. Being satisfied that it is in the interests of justice to do so, I refer the applicant, Maureen Mary Young, to the Registrar for referral to a barrister for legal assistance to give advice in relation to the leave granted by this Court in order 1 made 1 September 2016; 2. The notice of motion filed 11 October 2016 is otherwise dismissed.
Catchwords:	PRACTICE – pro bono referral – whether referral in interests of justice – where applicant has previously received referral – scope of pro bono referral scheme – whether referral appropriate in relation to special leave application
Legislation Cited:	Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW)
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Maureen Mary Young (Applicant) Roads and Maritime Services (Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel: In person (Applicant) N/A (Respondent) Solicitors: In person (Applicant) N/A (Respondent)
File Number(s):	2014/339704
Decision under appeal	Court or tribunal: Supreme Court Jurisdiction: Common Law Division Citation: Young v Roads and Maritime Services [2015] NSWSC 918; Young v Roads and Maritime Services (No 2) [2015] NSWSC 1944; Young v Roads and Maritime Services (No 3) [2016] NSWSC 491 Date of Decision: 10 July 2015; 17 December 2015; 22 April 2016 Before: Hidden J; Button J File Number(s): 2014/198018; 2015/249441