MAZUR MATTERS 64: THE COURT REJECTS WOULD BE APPELLANT'S ARGUMENT THAT A CLAIMANT'S REPRESENTATIVE HAD NO RIGHT OF AUDIENCE

MAZUR MATTERS 64: THE COURT REJECTS WOULD BE APPELLANT’S ARGUMENT THAT A CLAIMANT’S REPRESENTATIVE HAD NO RIGHT OF AUDIENCE

July 10, 2026 · by · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Setting aside judgment

The Court considered a “Mazur” type argument in this application for permission to appeal. The appellant arguing that the claimant had never been lawfully represented at previous hearings. This argument did not get very far.  The judge indicated that, even…

FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH DIRECTIONS IN THE FAMILY COURT: "THEY ARE NOT PREFERENCES, REQUESTS OR MERE INDICATIONS; THEY ARE ORDERS"

FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH DIRECTIONS IN THE FAMILY COURT: “THEY ARE NOT PREFERENCES, REQUESTS OR MERE INDICATIONS; THEY ARE ORDERS”

May 11, 2021 · by · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

I am always wary of venturing into an area occupied by many exceptional family bloggers. However court order, and in particular compliance with court orders,  is part of the regular diet of this blog. That is why a case with…