A trial judge has a duty to provide some advice and assistance to a self-represented litigant so as to ensure that the proceedings are conducted fairly but there are limits to the assistance which can properly be given. An example of this can be seen in the case of Cicek v The Estate of the Late Mark Solomon, where the New South Wales Court of Appeal held that the duty is not a duty to run the case for the self-represented litigant.  I have written a paper about the case. Read the paper here.

The New South Wales Court of Appeal has held, in Kisimul Holdings Pty Ltd v Clear Position Pty Ltd, that the absence of the ‘no genuine dispute’ statement from the affidavit accompanying a creditor’s statutory demand is, of itself, “some other reason” to set aside the statutory demand under s 459J(1)(b) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). I have written a paper about the case. Read the paper here

In Hudson Investment Group Limited v Atanaskovic, the New South Wales Court of Appeal found that a client who alleged that its former solicitors had breached their duty of care to the client because they had drafted provisions in a deed that were unclear or ambiguous had failed to establish that it was appropriate for the solicitors’ liability (assuming breach of duty) to extend to the loss claimed by the client. I have written a paper about the case. Read the paper here 

In the case of Melbourne City Investments Pty Ltd v Treasury Wine Estates Limited (No 3), Justice Ferguson of the Victorian Supreme Court found that a solicitor who was not independent of the lead plaintiff in a class action was compromised in his role as solicitor. I have written a paper about the case. Read the paper here.