The appellant challenged a family law order setting aside a marriage contract, arguing the trial was unfair because of his hearing impairment.
The Court of Appeal held that the trial judge accommodated the self-represented appellant and that the record did not support any unfairness affecting the outcome.
The court further held it was open to the trial judge to conclude there had been inadequate financial disclosure and that the responding party did not understand the nature or consequences of the contract.
Fresh evidence was admitted for the limited purpose of understanding the hearing-impairment argument, but the appeal was dismissed.
