Description
It was not appropriate to adjourn a trial date in the absence of good medical evidence.
It was held that though illness could be a ground for an adjournment but there had to be a good evidential basis for so doing. However, the applicant's doctor had failed to conduct further investigations into her suspected illness and as such there was no good medical evidence of a diagnosis before the court. Instead, the doctor had referred to the applicant as "ill" within his report, but the court could not act on that information. Though there was minimal evidence of stress, in the absence of cogent medical evidence that was also no reason to adjourn. Furthermore, despite the doctor's letter stating that the applicant needed to rest and absenting her from work for a month, there was evidence that she had been involved in a raid on the family company in Greece. There was thus no good medical evidence to support the proposition that the applicant was unable to attend trial or properly instruct her legal representatives on the ground of ill health.
