When David approached the Self-Representation Service he was unemployed and had no assets. He had been involved in a long-running dispute with his former landlord arising from his eviction from a commercial property in 1999. He had limited formal education and he presented to the service with his trousers held up with a piece of string. It might have been easy to dismiss David as a ‘nuisance’ and vexatious-type litigant. However, careful examination of his case suggested that he had legitimate reason for feeling aggrieved.
Francine* was employed as a book keeper by a sole trader concreting business in Tasmania. Francine’s employer was looking to expand his business when he came across a spray paving licensing opportunity with ‘We-Spray-U’* , based in Adelaide. We-Spray-U (WSU) marketed ‘packages’ which are said to include confidential business and technical material, training, on-going support and equipment in relation to concrete decorating and resurfacing.